Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorvan den Berg, Herman Anthony
dc.contributor.authorKaur, Vaneet
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-05T14:14:28Z
dc.date.available2021-08-05T14:14:28Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca/handle/2453/4834
dc.descriptionThis is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of knowledge management. A definitive version will be subsequently published in Journal of knowledge management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2020-0774 Publisher Deposit License: Emerald allows authors to deposit their AAM under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial International Licence 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0). To do this, the deposit must clearly state that the AAM is deposited under this licence and that any reuse is allowed in accordance with the terms outlined by the licence. To reuse the AAM for commercial purposes, permission should be sought by contacting permissions@emeraldinsight.com. For the sake of clarity, commercial usage would be considered as, but not limited to: o Copying or downloading AAMs for further distribution for a fee; o Any use of the AAM in conjunction with advertising; o Any use of the AAM by for promotional purposes by for-profit organisations; o Any use that would confer monetary reward, commercial gain or commercial exploitation. Emerald appreciates that some authors may not wish to use the CC BY-NC licence; in this case, you should deposit the AAM and include the copyright line of the published article. Should you have any questions about our licensing policies, please contact permissions@emeraldinsight.com.en_US
dc.description.abstractFundamental classifications of knowledge may be measurable as factors of production and can reveal evidence of specialization between adjacent stages of production even in the presence of shared substantive knowledge. The present study aims to distinguish between, and empirically measure, relative reliance on fundamental classifications knowledge at the individual level. In this study, investment managers were asked in an online survey to weigh their relative reliance on tacit, codified, and encapsulated knowledge in executing different investment strategies for diverse client groups. Measures of relative reliance on each fundamental classification of knowledge were derived from weights assigned by each survey respondent in a series of six questions. Survey respondents provided reliable measures of their relative reliance on tacit, codified, and encapsulated knowledge. Reliance on these fundamental classifications of knowledge is shown to differ between investment managers, depending on the investment strategies being employed and client groups served. These differences were exhibited notwithstanding all the respondents sharing common substantive knowledge. Measures of relative reliance on three classifications of knowledge were based on self-reported ratings rather than on objectively observed phenomena, making them subject to measurement error. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to observe relative reliance on tacit, codified and encapsulated knowledge in future studies. The divergences in relative reliance on the fundamentally different knowledge-based factors of production were found in the presence of jointly-held substantive knowledge, suggesting that fundamental classifications of knowledge are measurable and can provide evidence of specialization.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEmerald Publishingen_US
dc.subjectTacit knowledgeen_US
dc.subjectEncapsulated knowledgeen_US
dc.subjectCodified knowledgeen_US
dc.subjectSubstantive knowledgeen_US
dc.subjectInvestment management professionalsen_US
dc.subjectKnowledge measurementen_US
dc.titleIndividual Knowledge Measurement: Organizational Knowledge Measured at the Individual Levelen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.source.urlhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2020-0774en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record