There is a strong push in public health for multi-faceted partnerships to develop practice-relevant evidence that effectively address complex risk factors like tobacco use. Consequently, new partnership structures that cross-cut different social groups are emerging to harness their distinct knowledge and generate actionable breakthroughs. Little is known about these structures, particularly informal ones that hinge on voluntary group membership like Communities of Practice (CoPs). Specifically, little is known about the factors/processes that enable people representing different social groups to translate their knowledge across group boundaries and co-create knowledge that informs action in these informal structures. Calls to develop/test theories, frameworks, and models are made to enlighten these gaps. This study responded to these calls by developing and testing a conceptual framework. The framework asserts that a shared identity, member identification / sense of belonging, social capital and psychological safety contribute to diverse people cohering into a collective, which was deemed important to enable knowledge to translate across group boundaries. The study examined how each factor influenced and inter-related to influence the use of CoP-related knowledge and its different types (with an emphasis on conceptual and instrumental uses). The study also examined what factors contributed to or detracted from these relationships in the context of the Program Training and Consultation Centre’s tobacco control specific Learning through Evidence and Action Reflection Network (LEARN) Community of Practice (CoP) project. Following a pragmatist orientation, a two-phased quant-QUAL sequential, explanatory mixed-methods embedded case study design was employed. The LEARN CoP project formed the case study and two CoPs that comprised that project formed the embedded units. Phase I of the study involved a quantitative survey that was completed by 35 of 58 eligible LEARN CoP members. The Phase II dominant qualitative study involved ~90 minute audio-recorded telephone interviews of 14 LEARN CoP members (seven per embedded unit) who comprised a subset of Phase I survey respondents (nested sampling approach). CoP documents (meeting minutes, audio-recorded meetings, Community Charters and Learning Agendas, WebEx™ discussion posts) served as supplementary data sources. Phase I quantitative analyses examined whether each factor of interest predicted knowledge use using simple and multiple linear regression, tested an analytic model that proposed shared identity led to knowledge use via the mediators member identification, social capital and psychological safety using Baron & Kenny’s (1986) mediation approach and Goodman’s Test (1960) for confirmation. As a prelude to the Phase II qualitative study, descriptive statistics, t-tests and ANOVA were conducted to discern how the LEARN CoP and more specifically each of its embedded units (CoP A and CoP B) were developing with respect to the factors of interest and what differences existed between the two communities. Phase I findings loosely informed the focus of the Phase II qualitative study and data were coded and analysed using open, axial and selective coding procedures (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Phase I and Phase II data were compared and contrasted in the discussion, with greater emphasis placed on the qualitative findings. Overall findings revealed that in the LEARN CoP case, each factor in the conceptual framework influenced how members used knowledge gained in the CoP. These factors also inter-related in ways that helped diverse members to cohere in ways that influenced knowledge use. Shared identity, member identification / sense of belonging and psychological safety were related to conceptual types of knowledge use (increased awareness, learning as a result of CoP knowledge). Social capital was the only factor that was related to both conceptual and instrumental types of CoP knowledge use (e.g., knowledge gained from the CoP was used to inform decision making or applied in some fashion in practice). However, member identification / sense of belonging emerged as an important theme that motivated members to interact and build social capital which in turn led to instrumental types of knowledge use. A superordinate identity (shaped by a common and actionable purpose) helped members to jel together despite representing different social groups by serving as an anchor point for member identification / sense of belonging. The CoP’s ‘alignment’ with the philosophies, culture and priorities of important entity’s that shaped the CoP’s work (e.g., government and the organizations that members represented) also influenced the use of CoP knowledge. Other factors including relevant knowledge, leadership (including member roles), and a variety of mechanisms that enabled interaction (i.e., in-person meetings, WebEx, teleconferences, structured time for practice sharing, working groups) contributed to or detracted from the relationships found in the study. Solving complex problems like tobacco-related chronic diseases necessitates building multi-faceted partnership structures that connect different configurations of an existing or desired system and their respective knowledge. This is not an easy task because it requires bringing together people representing potentially different social identities that possess their own ways of thinking and doing, which can limit knowledge use. This study sought to understand how factors that help diverse people to cohere into a collective enhance knowledge use. The study highlights the need to understand identity-based issues at play when people from different social groups are brought together in partnership structures like the formally instituted, voluntary CoP examined. Cultivating a shared identity and sense of belonging can bridge silos and motivate people to engage in behaviours that build rich pools of social capital. These factors together can enhance the co-creation and use of evidence and collective action that can save lives.

There is a strong push in public health for multi-faceted partnerships to develop practice-relevant evidence that effectively address complex risk factors like tobacco use. Consequently, new partnership structures that cross-cut different social groups are emerging to harness their distinct knowledge and generate actionable breakthroughs. Little is known about these structures, particularly informal ones that hinge on voluntary group membership like Communities of Practice (CoPs). Specifically, little is known about the factors/processes that enable people representing different social groups to translate their knowledge across group boundaries and co-create knowledge that informs action in these informal structures. Calls to develop/test theories, frameworks, and models are made to enlighten these gaps. This study responded to these calls by developing and testing a conceptual framework. The framework asserts that a shared identity, member identification / sense of belonging, social capital and psychological safety contribute to diverse people cohering into a collective, which was deemed important to enable knowledge to translate across group boundaries. The study examined how each factor influenced and inter-related to influence the use of CoP-related knowledge and its different types (with an emphasis on conceptual and instrumental uses). The study also examined what factors contributed to or detracted from these relationships in the context of the Program Training and Consultation Centre’s tobacco control specific Learning through Evidence and Action Reflection Network (LEARN) Community of Practice (CoP) project. Following a pragmatist orientation, a two-phased quant-QUAL sequential, explanatory mixed-methods embedded case study design was employed. The LEARN CoP project formed the case study and two CoPs that comprised that project formed the embedded units. Phase I of the study involved a quantitative survey that was completed by 35 of 58 eligible LEARN CoP members. The Phase II dominant qualitative study involved ~90 minute audio-recorded telephone interviews of 14 LEARN CoP members (seven per embedded unit) who comprised a subset of Phase I survey respondents (nested sampling approach). CoP documents (meeting minutes, audio-recorded meetings, Community Charters and Learning Agendas, WebEx™ discussion posts) served as supplementary data sources. Phase I quantitative analyses examined whether each factor of interest predicted knowledge use using simple and multiple linear regression, tested an analytic model that proposed shared identity led to knowledge use via the mediators member identification, social capital and psychological safety using Baron & Kenny’s (1986) mediation approach and Goodman’s Test (1960) for confirmation. As a prelude to the Phase II qualitative study, descriptive statistics, t-tests and ANOVA were conducted to discern how the LEARN CoP and more specifically each of its embedded units (CoP A and CoP B) were developing with respect to the factors of interest and what differences existed between the two communities. Phase I findings loosely informed the focus of the Phase II qualitative study and data were coded and analysed using open, axial and selective coding procedures (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Phase I and Phase II data were compared and contrasted in the discussion, with greater emphasis placed on the qualitative findings. Overall findings revealed that in the LEARN CoP case, each factor in the conceptual framework influenced how members used knowledge gained in the CoP. These factors also inter-related in ways that helped diverse members to cohere in ways that influenced knowledge use. Shared identity, member identification / sense of belonging and psychological safety were related to conceptual types of knowledge use (increased awareness, learning as a result of CoP knowledge). Social capital was the only factor that was related to both conceptual and instrumental types of CoP knowledge use (e.g., knowledge gained from the CoP was used to inform decision making or applied in some fashion in practice). However, member identification / sense of belonging emerged as an important theme that motivated members to interact and build social capital which in turn led to instrumental types of knowledge use. A superordinate identity (shaped by a common and actionable purpose) helped members to jel together despite representing different social groups by serving as an anchor point for member identification / sense of belonging. The CoP’s ‘alignment’ with the philosophies, culture and priorities of important entity’s that shaped the CoP’s work (e.g., government and the organizations that members represented) also influenced the use of CoP knowledge. Other factors including relevant knowledge, leadership (including member roles), and a variety of mechanisms that enabled interaction (i.e., in-person meetings, WebEx, teleconferences, structured time for practice sharing, working groups) contributed to or detracted from the relationships found in the study. Solving complex problems like tobacco-related chronic diseases necessitates building multi-faceted partnership structures that connect different configurations of an existing or desired system and their respective knowledge. This is not an easy task because it requires bringing together people representing potentially different social identities that possess their own ways of thinking and doing, which can limit knowledge use. This study sought to understand how factors that help diverse people to cohere into a collective enhance knowledge use. The study highlights the need to understand identity-based issues at play when people from different social groups are brought together in partnership structures like the formally instituted, voluntary CoP examined. Cultivating a shared identity and sense of belonging can bridge silos and motivate people to engage in behaviours that build rich pools of social capital. These factors together can enhance the co-creation and use of evidence and collective action that can save lives.

Throughout the world, both producers and consumers of food are critically analyzing and enacting changes away from the globalized, industrial paradigm associated with conventional practices in agriculture and food production/distribution/consumption and towards the localization of food networks. Contributing to growing resistance movements aimed at gaining greater food security and sovereignty, local food discourses are strengthened by a combination of political, socio-economic, ecological, and cultural reasoning. This critical ethnography examines how knowledge and meaning is constructed in the context of an alternative food discourse through the personal and shared experiences of six participants in rural Saskatchewan. Further, the study explores the factors that influence participants sense of personal and/or collective transformation. Data were collected over six months using the methods of participant interviews, a focus group, and observation. Data analysis used temporal sequencing of meaning-making factors or ingredients that were categorized to detail how the creation and affective use of knowledge in transformative learning occurred in the context of localizing food networks in rural Saskatchewan.

Throughout the world, both producers and consumers of food are critically analyzing and enacting changes away from the globalized, industrial paradigm associated with conventional practices in agriculture and food production/distribution/consumption and towards the localization of food networks. Contributing to growing resistance movements aimed at gaining greater food security and sovereignty, local food discourses are strengthened by a combination of political, socio-economic, ecological, and cultural reasoning. This critical ethnography examines how knowledge and meaning is constructed in the context of an alternative food discourse through the personal and shared experiences of six participants in rural Saskatchewan. Further, the study explores the factors that influence participants sense of personal and/or collective transformation. Data were collected over six months using the methods of participant interviews, a focus group, and observation. Data analysis used temporal sequencing of meaning-making factors or ingredients that were categorized to detail how the creation and affective use of knowledge in transformative learning occurred in the context of localizing food networks in rural Saskatchewan.

This study investigates if companies that actively use export information have higher export growth rates or greater satisfaction with export performance measures than non-users. Organizational communication structures relating to information flow to decision makers is investigated to provide further insight into the role of export information. The study is based upon the knowledge utilization theory which states company/user characteristics are as important to information utilization as the characteristics of the specific piece of information. Bivariate analysis does not indicate a direct relationship between information use and reported higher export growth rates over the past four years. However, there are indications of divergence in how information users and non-users view and utilize information. One critical finding is that information users have a statistically significant relationship toward symbolic utilization of export information. Additional differences were observed in third-party information use versus monitoring world news to evaluate export operations. The study investigates company characteristics against the three components of knowledge utilization (instrumental, conceptual and symbolic use) and the five components of information use (competitive advantage, information acquisition/need, influence of information on decisionmaking, organizational learning and organizational knowledge/information processing).

No description available.

No description available.

It has been widely acknowledged that today’s business world is characterized by severe competition. To remain competitive, firms have to employ alternative strategies to keep up with the fast paced development. One such strategy is coopetition; firms collaborate in some areas to combine their resources while competing in other areas. Thus, instead of trying to master everything within a company’s own walls, emphasis is towards gaining access to external resources and coordinating the wide array of expertise in the best possible way to achieve competitive advantage. In addition, growing requirements from the customer end force firms to combine their resources to be able to put together tailored solutions. This entails a notable customer input in product development and firm’s ability to utilize market knowledge can not be undermined. However, before the feedback gained from the market can act as a source of competitive edge, it has to be further processed into a form in which it offers strategic value for the company. This research aims to study how market knowledge is utilized to create competitive in the interface of inter- and intra-organizational coopetition. Even though competition is often considered to take place between firms, competitive elements can also be found within firms. For that reason, we include both inter- and intra-organizational coopetition in the research. In terms of the process involved in market knowledge utilization, three steps are appointed; transfer, translation and transformation of knowledge. To perform the research, we selected a high technology company belonging to SME category present in the information security business as case company. Six semi-structured interviews were conducted on three different occasions. Due to the sensitive nature of the research topic, the case company remains anonymous and is referred to as Case Company in the research. By ensuring respondents’ anonymity, the gained responses are more likely to be honest and thus more reliable and comprehensive. The empirical findings revealed differences in market knowledge utilization between inter- and intra-organizational coopetition. While coopetition taking place between firms was characterized with dominating competitive element and protection of one’s own assets, only preliminary stages of market knowledge utilization were found to be present. This entailed that knowledge transformation was absent in the inter-organizational context. On the other hand, on the intra-organizational level a collective approach to knowledge coordination was employed and attention had been paid on establishing sufficient structural conditions to support the knowledge utilization process. Thus, the process within the company was more efficient and it completed the knowledge utilization process at the inter-organizational level as knowledge transformation took place only within Case Company. While coopetition is a rather new field of study, we believe that the performed research provided information on inter- and intra-organizational coopetition in an SME present in the high technology industry and gave insights of the knowledge exchange both within and across companies. In the end, we have built up a model including the most important findings of the study. The figure entails the market knowledge utilization processes visualized in both inter- and intra-organizational contexts.

It is conventional to argue that the autonomy and reputation of regulatory agencies depend on their expertise. Yet the studies on how independent regulatory agencies (IRAs) create and deploy their knowledge capacity are few and far apart. Normatively, the justification for delegating decision-making powers to IRAs is that they operate by using technical analysis and expertise rather than political considerations. But yet again, although delegation has been discussed as a design principle, systematic evidence on the conditions under which IRAs make use of knowledge and how is still scarce. The literature on knowledge utilization portrays a rather complex link between expertise and policy, where relevant knowledge is not always reflected in policy outcomes and plays several functions besides facilitating the solution of policy problems. Unfortunately, scholars of IRAs have not exploited the insights of this literature yet. This dissertation addresses the under-explored question of the usage of economic knowledge by IRAs. We identify four possible uses of expertise: instrumental (i.e., to solve problems); strategic (e.g. to advocate a position); symbolic (e.g., to gain legitimacy), and non-use. Our aim is to explain under which conditions a certain usage is more likely to occur. To do so, we draw on the methodological device of explanatory typologies (Elman 2005). Specifically, we select two explanatory dimensions that reflect both the context and the content of policy: the level of conflict in the policy arena, and the degree problem tractability. We use different combinations of these two dimensions to derive four hypotheses on the possible uses of expertise mentioned above. The elusive nature of knowledge utilization makes the identification and measurement of these different usages highly dependent on an in-depth understanding of the institutional, organisational, and political context in which a regulatory decision is taken. We have thus opted for a qualitative approach based on case studies and process tracing (Bennett 2010; Brady 2010; Freedman 2010) to appraise the four hypotheses. Empirically, we performed three case studies on regulatory policy decisions taken by the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) between 2005 and 2010. We find that, given certain scope conditions, the prevalent use of economic analysis is instrumental - a finding that contradicts previous research that labelled instrumental learning as extremely rare, if not a sort of technocratic utopia. Other uses still exist however, and given other scope conditions regulators can be strategic and symbolic in their approach to knowledge and expertise. This is not surprising if we accept the notion that regulators operate in a policy environment that is eminently but not exclusively technical: to survive in a (at least partially) political environment, regulators have to deploy usages of knowledge that deviate from the instrumental type.

Since various public and private actors at the international, supranational, national and subnational levels started to adopt long-term targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, low-carbon scenario analyses have flourished. Literature reveals an increasing number of analyses envisioning and exploring alternative images of low-carbon futures, as well as their adjacent transition pathways. Scenario approaches or “foresight” is intended to help policy-makers to navigate the maelstrom of confusion and conflicts associated with highly complex societal challenges such as climate change – i.e. the “super-wicked” problems. Typical scenario exercises aim at coping with uncertainty and conflicting values, and hence are often claimed as a suitable approach for knowing and governing super-wicked problems. When reviewing the scenario literature published over the recent years, we observe significant methodological developments, in particular at the level of the calculus or data-sets. These contributions have generated an increasing technical sophistication of scenario building methods, and contrast with the relative absence of social sciences research on scenarios. Scenario analyses have received little academic attention from social sciences, whether they are political science, sociology, philosophy of science or science and technology studies. By providing a SHS-analysis of low-carbon scenarios, the present thesis contributes to bridge this research gap. Scenarios are here understood as “boundary objects” linking different social worlds: science and policy, but also natural and social sciences. This thesis aspires to create an enhanced understanding on how scenario analyses perform such “boundary work”. More specifically, the following analysis of low-carbon scenarios is based on a twofold perspective focusing, on the one hand, on the interactions between low-carbon scenarios and governance (i.e. link between science and policy), and, on the other hand, on the making of knowledge about governance in low-carbon scenarios (i.e. link between natural and social sciences). In other words, it explores “scenarios in governance” and “governance in scenarios”. The thesis project includes three research axes, each based on its particular empirics. A first study explores the interactions between low-carbon scenarios and governance on the basis of a multiple case study analysing the role of four energy foresight studies in policy-making. The other two studies focus on the making of knowledge about governance in low-carbon scenarios. One of them provides an assessment of the knowledge needed to steer the low-carbon transition. The other one aims at contributing to the debate on the relations between quantitative modelling and social sciences by exposing a critical review of socio-technical energy transition models. The objective of the present thesis thus consists in providing an empirical contribution to social sciences research on low-carbon scenarios. / Doctorat en Sciences / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished