Knowledge Management and Professional Work
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current theories of knowledge management postulate a cycle of knowledge creation, refinement, and implementation that hinges on the transformation of tacit, or practical, into explicit, or discursive, knowledge. Using field research in Denmark and Japan as illustration, the authors argue for a richer view of knowledge than simply the conversion of individual knowledge into a form susceptible to transmission. Knowledge, they show, is relative to what Lave and Wenger call communities of practice. The key to understanding the generation and sharing of knowledge, the authors argue, is the role of text as both knowledge representation (product) and the means by which communities sustain organization (process). The modern organization, because it is characterized by diverse local practices, and by the increasing salience of professional work, is thus a complex mosaic of situated knowledge, grounded in process. The authors consider the implication of this diversity for managerial practice in a knowledge-based society.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it