Call for Papers

As organizational scholars, we are witnessing exciting and unsettling times: many of the processes and mechanisms that we have studied in the past are irreversibly changing. New organizational forms, previously unimaginable technologies, new work processes, and blurring boundaries are just some of the features of our times. However, one of the remaining fixtures of our discipline is the foundational role of knowledge. While there is debate about the nature of knowledge (Hadjimichael & Tsoukas, 2019), who creates, shares, and utilizes knowledge (Anthony, 2021; Nonaka & von Krogh, 2009), how people do it (Safadi, Johnson, & Faraj, 2021) using which technology (Bailey, Faraj, Hinds, Leonardi, & von Krogh, 2022), where, with whom (Faraj, Jarvenpaa, & Majchrzak, 2011), and subject to which boundary conditions (Moser & Deichmann, 2021), there is consensus that knowledge is, and will remain, a foundational feature of organizing and a crossroad of many organizational mechanisms and processes (Foss, Husted, & Michailova, 2010; Zuboff, 2022).
 
Prior work has tackled many of the abovementioned aspects. Scholars have studied, mostly conceptually, new organizational forms (Faraj, von Krogh, Monteiro, & Lakhani, 2016), the role of technology (Faraj & Leonardi, 2022; den Hond & Moser, 2022; Orlikowski & Scott, 2008) and specifically algorithms (Glaser, Pollock, & D’Adderio, 2021; Kellogg, Valentine, & Christin, 2019; Moser, den Hond, & Lindebaum, 2022; Shrestha, Ben-Menahem, & von Krogh, 2019) in business and society. And of course, there are many empirical accounts of knowledge sharing (e.g., Deichmann, Moser, & van den Ende, 2022; Haas, Criscuolo, & George, 2015; Hwang, Singh, & Argote, 2015; Lin & Joe, 2012; Reinholt, Pedersen, & Foss, 2011), and the role of technology and, recently, algorithms (e.g., Jago, 2019; Omidvar, Safavi, & Glaser, 2022; Rahman, 2021) in organizations.
 
Yet, what happens at the crossroads of knowledge, people, and technology in this evolving landscape of new organizational forms and work processes, technologies, and boundaries remains largely unexplored. The nexus between these different elements promises many answers to important questions, especially with regards to potential outcomes and consequences.
 
Putting knowledge at the centre of our attention will allow us to investigate the people who engage with and for knowledge; the technologies and algorithms that they use for it; the physical and virtual spaces where they do that; and the temporalities and rhythms that structure their engagement. As such, using knowledge as a lens to guide our inquiries promises to yield rich and interdisciplinary insights on multiple levels and including a variety of actors. This is because studying knowledge allows us to investigate social interaction between people and teams, the human-technology nexus, and the local and global spaces and times of knowledge engagement.
 
In our sub-theme, we look forward to accepting conceptual and empirical articles that address the crossroads of knowledge in organizations, with attention to the intersection of different people, technologies, spaces, and temporalities. The sub-theme intends to stimulate a constructive dialogue around conceptual and empirical research across these and related issues. High-quality, novel contributions in both early and later stages of development are warmly invited. We fully expect to attract novel, risky, and exciting work that can push the boundaries of our current understanding of knowledge and organizations.
 
Some possible questions are listed below, but these are neither complete nor exhaustive (so please feel free to surprise us!):

• What is the role of knowledge in new organizational forms?

• How do new organizational forms shape our social interaction with and around knowledge?

• How does the use of technology and algorithms shape how people in organizations create and share knowledge?

• How does the use of, and exposure to, automated decision-making by algorithms shape human decision-making and judgment?

• What is the role of spatial and temporal boundaries in virtual knowledge sharing?

• What are the cultural and social boundaries of technology-driven knowledge creation and sharing?

• What is the role of physical space in organizational knowledge sharing?

• How can organizations move physical work and knowledge sharing to a virtual environment, and vice versa?

• What are the temporalities of online and offline knowledge sharing?

• How do virtual and physical spaces structure organizational rhythms?

• How are the rhythms of technology and algorithms intertwined with organizational rhythms?

• What are important crossroads between knowledge and knowing, people, and technology?

References

• Anthony, C. 2021. When Knowledge Work and Analytical Technologies Collide: The Practices and Consequences of Black Boxing Algorithmic Technologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 000183922110167.
• Bailey, D., Faraj, S., Hinds, P., Leonardi, P., & von Krogh, G. 2022. We are all theorists of technology now: A relational perspective on emerging technology and organizing. Organization Science, 33 (1): 1–18.
• Deichmann, D., Moser, C., & van den Ende, J. 2022. Talk, talk, talk: Exploring idea conversations and the micro-level foundations of knowledge sharing for innovation. Innovation: Organization & Management, 23 (3): 287–313.
• Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Majchrzak, A. 2011. Knowledge collaboration in online communities. Organization Science, 22 (5): 1224–1239.
• Faraj, S., von Krogh, G., Monteiro, E., & Lakhani, K. R. 2016. Online community as space for knowledge flows. Information Systems Research, 27 (4): 668–684.
• Faraj, S., & Leonardi, P. 2022. EXPRESS: Strategic organization in the digital age: Rethinking the concept of technology. Strategic Organization, 14761270221130252.
• Foss, N., Husted, K., & Michailova, S. 2010. Governing knowledge sharing in organizations: Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions. Journal of Management Studies, 47 (3): 455–482.
• Glaser, V., Pollock, N., & D’Adderio, L. 2021. The biography of an algorithm: Performing algorithmic technologies in organizations. Organization Theory, 2: 1–27.
• Haas, M. R., Criscuolo, P., & George, G. 2015. Which problems to solve? Attention allocation and online knowledge sharing in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 58 (3): 680–711.
• Hadjimichael, D., & Tsoukas, H. 2019. Towards a better understanding of tacit knowledge in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, annals.2017.0084.
• Hwang, E. H., Singh, P. V., & Argote, L. 2015. Knowledge Sharing in Online Communities: Learning to Cross Geographic and Hierarchical Boundaries. Organization Science, 26 (6): 1593–1611.
• Jago, A. S. 2019. Algorithms and authenticity. Academy of Management Discoveries, 5 (1): 38–56.
• Kellogg, K., Valentine, M., & Christin, A. 2019. Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174.
• Lin, C.-P., & Joe, S.-W. 2012. To share or not to share: Assessing knowledge sharing, interemployee helping, and their antecedents among online knowledge workers. Journal of Business Ethics, 108 (4): 439–449.
• Moser, C., & Deichmann, D. 2021. Knowledge sharing in two cultures: The moderating effect of national culture on perceived knowledge quality in online communities. European Journal of Information Systems, 30 (6): 623–641.
• Moser, C., den Hond, F., & Lindebaum, D. 2022. Morality in the age of artificially intelligent algorithms. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 21 (1): 139–155.
• Nonaka, I., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective—Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20 (3), 635-652.
• Omidvar, O., Safavi, M., & Glaser, V. L. 2022. Algorithmic routines and dynamic inertia: How organizations avoid adapting to changes in the environment. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12819.
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. 2008. Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. Academy of Management Annals, 2 (1): 433–474.
• Rahman, H. A. 2021. The invisible cage: Workers’ reactivity to opaque algorithmic evaluations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66 (4): 945–988.
• Reinholt, M., Pedersen, T., & Foss, N. J. 2011. Why a central network position isn’t enough: The role of motivation and ability for knowledge sharing in employee networks. Academy of Management Journal, 54 (6): 1277–1297.
• Safadi, H., Johnson, S. L., & Faraj, S. 2021. Who contributes knowledge? Core-periphery tension in online innovation communities. Organization Science, 32 (3): 752–775.
• Shrestha, Y. R., Ben-Menahem, S. M., & von Krogh, G. 2019. Organizational decision-making structures in the age of artificial intelligence. California Management Review, 61 (4): 66–83.
• Zuboff, S. 2022. Surveillance capitalism or democracy? The death match of institutional orders and the politics of knowledge in our information civilization. Organization Theory, 3: 1–79.
•