Styhre, A and Gluch, P (2010) Managing knowledge in platforms: Boundary objects and stocks and flows of knowledge. Construction Management and Economics, 28(6), pp. 589-599. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Previous research suggests that construction industry companies use relatively little formal managerial procedures when managing knowledge. Instead, many construction companies are relying on informal networks and social capital as conduits for the sharing of knowledge. However, objects play an important role in organizations as vehicles for the sharing of knowledge. The use of platforms, standardized packages of prescribed components, routines and practices, in a major Scandinavian construction company (SCC), demonstrates that platforms are potentially useful when sharing and accumulating knowledge. The platform concept is a boundary object integrating various functions and activities and standardizing work procedures while at the same time leaving some room for contingencies and local conditions. SCC's use of platforms contributes to the understanding of knowledge sharing practices by emphasizing the role of formally enacted objects and tools and by underlining the need for bridging and bonding the stocks and flows of knowledge in construction companies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | boundary objects; construction; knowledge sharing; platforms |
| Index terms: | routine, social capital, knowledge sharing, boundary object, construction company, platform, package, construction industry |
| Subjects: | knowledge management, contractual arrangements, organization, sociology, collaborative management, industry analysis, digital design |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Organizational Design, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here