The ‘becoming to know’ framework

Jakubik (2011) further developed her research on knowledge creation by setting up the ‘becoming to know’ framework introduced in the previous section on learning.

This framework focusses on the epistemological side of dynamic knowledge creation. Through this framework Jakubik (2011, p.377) wanted to “enhance the understanding of the dynamic, dialectic, emerging and practice-based process of knowledge creation as a social phenomenon”. By setting up this model, Jakubik (2011) followed Cook and Brown’s (1999) call for a better understanding and improved models of social processes of knowledge creation. She also attended to Nonaka et al.’s (2008) call for research paying more attention to ontological and epistemological issues.

Jakubik (2011) based her research on the previous research undertaken in the field of dynamic knowledge creation by Nonaka and his colleagues with special emphasis on the most recent focus on aspects of subjectivity, practicality and processual nature. By doing this, she followed and aimed at contributing to a constructivist discourse in which knowledge is understood as constantly affecting and being affected by social practices of individuals in communities. According to this approach, which focusses on practices of learning and knowing, both knowledge and learning are not separated from action (Schultze and Stabell, 2004).

The framework is based on the concepts of learning, knowing and becoming.

Learning, in line with the social perspective on learning by Wenger (2005), is understood as being social, a matter of engagement and participation, as being inherent to the nature of humans, and as happening both consciously and

unconsciously in formal or informal contexts. Learning according to this approach and in line with the understanding of this thesis happens not in individual heads but in social interaction between individuals (Lave and Wenger, 1999). The process of collaborative learning is regarded as an iterative process during which knowledge is created. In line with this understanding, Jakubik (2011) argues that knowledge cannot be regarded as objective, existing independently of human actions, since it is constantly shaped by social practices within formal and informal communities.

Instead, she views knowledge, or knowing, as a process and learning as being an inherent part of this process which corresponds to the social-constructionist perspective on knowing and learning. Knowing is regarded as an emerging and dynamic never-ending process which is also characterised by being dialectic and as a process of constant experiencing, learning and sense making (Jakubik, 2011).

An individual engaging in processes of learning and knowing brings in her or his identity, thoughts, values, beliefs, experiences and skills as well as expectations and aims which motivate and direct her or him to engage in a specific context.

Knowledge develops outside of the individual through exploration, experiencing, acting and interacting in the organisational context as well as through individual sense-making of the explorations and experiences in retrospect (Jakubik, 2011).

During these processes the individual “is changing, is becoming, as he or she develops new understandings, new meanings, new intentions, goals, and new perspectives” (Jakubik, 2011, p.386). Jakubik (2011) regards becoming in this context as changing a person in terms of the construction of self and of identity through the social construction of shared understanding in collaborative activities and social interaction. She understands this ‘becoming epistemology’ as a synthesis of social learning and knowing processes of individuals which offers new

experiences of knowing and learning and therewith new knowledge (Jakubik, 2011).

Jakubik (2011) aimed at offering insights into the social and human side of

knowledge creation by providing this framework which has largely been neglected by Nonaka et al. (2008).

The framework is illustrated in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 ‘Becoming to know’ framework Adapted from Jakubik (2011)

Jakubik’s research shifts the focus of knowledge creation to human interaction and participation in communities which are strongly impacted by aspects such as power and politics which were widely disregarded in Nonaka’s SECI model (Jakubik, 2011;

Bereiter, 2002). Whereas the SECI model is based on an epistemology of

possession and dualism with regard to knowledge, Jakubik’s framework is set up within a constructivist and participative paradigm (Jakubik, 2011). Jakubik (2011) proposes a replacement of the SECI model connected with a paradigm shift

focussing more on the human side of knowledge creation. While in the SECI model knowledge is created by a translation from tacit into explicit knowledge, knowledge develops during the interaction between individuals in Jakubik’s (2011) framework.

According to Jakubik (2011, p.394) “by illustrating the move from engagement to becoming through exploration, experiencing and emerging sense making and enabling, the proposed framework better demonstrates the evolutionary and social character of knowledge development than the latest model of knowledge creation”.

In summary, the framework illustrates that the process of knowledge creation is dialectic, iterative, interactive, social, dynamic and inseparable from the context it takes place in (Jakubik, 2011).

This thesis’ social-constructionist perspective largely corresponds with what Jakubik (2011) introduces as the ‘becoming epistemology’ and inherent to it her

understanding of the processes of learning, knowing and becoming. Jakubik’s (2011) accommodation of individuals’ prior skills and experiences in the knowledge creation process is also in line with the understanding of this thesis. However, the understanding of this thesis, in line with the social-constructionist perspective taken, is that the main locus of experiencing, interacting and sense-making and, inherent to it, the creation of new knowledge, is social interaction between individuals and not the indiviual’s mind which is suggested by the social-constructivist perspective of Jakubik (2011). Further, in this thesis the engagement of individuals in processes of knowing and learning is not understood as always taking place with a defined aim but also as taking place without any aims connected to it. However, Jakubik’s (2011) framework provides an in-depth insight into knowledge creation processes and has commenced a paradigm shift from a focus on the SECI model at the heart of knowledge creation processes to a focus on the social and human dimension in dynamic knowledge creation theory in knowledge management.

Notwithstanding, in this thesis the focus is on the context in which knowledge is created in social interaction between individuals and how this context impacts on individuals’ experiences of knowledge creation processes and their willingness to consciously participate in knowledge creation processes rather than on the process of knowledge creation itself. As promoted by Nonaka et al. (2006) and Choo and Neto (2010) management is supposed to enable and foster knowledge creation processes by providing certain conditions which add to a favourable context. This is also supported by von Krogh et al.’s (2000b) statement according to which

individuals cannot be forced to participate in knowing and learning processes and therefore it is important that the organisational context makes organisational members feel appreciated and valued in order to persuade them to participate fully in knowledge and learning activities and therewith knowledge creation processes (von Krogh et al., 2000b). Nonaka et al. (2006) promote that ba, the context in which knowledge is created, should receive greater attention in research. From their point of view the organisational context is still under-explored. In line with these

statements, this thesis focusses on exploring the organisational elements embedded in this context and their impact on individuals which is further discussed in Section 2.5.