Search

This paper identifies practices that can facilitate knowledge transfer in university--industry (U--I) research partnerships by systematically reviewing extant literature. We aim to contribute to the theoretical development in the field of academic engagement and propose that knowledge transfer provides a valuable perspective. We started our review with identifying barriers and facilitators of knowledge transfer. Extant literature identified knowledge differences and differences in goals resulting from different institutional cultures as important barriers to knowledge transfer. They result in ambiguity, problems with knowledge absorption and difficulties with the application of knowledge. Trust, communication, the use of intermediaries and experience are found as facilitators for knowledge transfer that help to resolve the identified barriers. Our analysis offers practical advice for the management of academic engagement. Finally, we identified questions for future research based on inconsistencies in extant research and open questions we encountered during our analysis.

Firm survival or reproduction does not occur as a matter of course. Especially under circumstances in which uncertainty and equivocality prevail is firm reproduction potentially problematic. Uncertainty prevails when there is insufficient or inadequate information to assess a situation, equivocality when the information available is multiinterpretable. Firm routines, social networks in a firm, and an organization’s identity can explain how a firm reproduces. We offer suggestions as to which of these will contribute to firm reproduction under what circumstances.

This book seeks to advance social economic analysis, economic methodology, and the history of economic thought in the context of twenty-first-century scholarship and socio-economic concerns. Bringing together carefully selected chapters by leading scholars it examines the central contributions that John Davis has made to various areas of scholarship. In recent decades, criticisms of mainstream economics have rekindled interest in a number of areas of scholarly inquiry that were frequently ignored by mainstream economic theory and practice during the second half of the twentieth century, including social economics, economic methodology and history of economic thought. This book contributes to a growing literature on the revival of these areas of scholarship and highlights the pivotal role that John Davis’s work has played in the ongoing revival. Together, the international panel of contributors show how Davis’s insights in complexity theory, identity, and stratification are key to understanding a reconfigured economic methodology. They also reveal that Davis’s willingness to draw from multiple academic disciplines gives us a platform for interrogating mainstream economics and provides the basis for a humane yet scientific alternative. This unique volume will be essential reading for advanced students and researchers across social economics, history of economic thought, economic methodology, political economy and philosophy of social science.

This is a book review of The Social Construction of Rationality: Policy Debates and the Power of Good Reasons Onno Bouwmeester . London and New York: Routledge, 2017. pp. xii, 203. £105 (hbk). ISBN 9781138851085. £24.49 (ebk). ISBN 9781315724379.

For 70 years, the Review of Social Economy (RoSE) has published high-quality peer-reviewed work on the many relationships between economics, ethics, and social values. The field of social economics...

In this article it is argued that there are notable parallels between all of the different strands within ethics on the one hand, and accountancy on the other that, in teaching, can be drawn upon to enhance students' understanding of the latter. Accountancy, part of economics, draws on utilitarian ethics, but not solely so. Accounting, in addition, draws on deontological and communitarian strands in ethics. The article suggests that the teaching of accounting - especially to non-economists - would benefit substantially from highlighting and developing these parallels.

Fashion is the quintessential post-modernist consumer practice, or so many hold. In this contribution, I argue that, on the contrary, fashion should be understood as a means of communicating one's commitment to modernist values. I introduce the framework of the Social Value Network, to relate such values to institutionalised consumption behaviour, allowing one to signal to others. Modernist values are not homogenous, and are in important ways contradictory, giving rise to the dynamics of fashion that can be observed.

"Knowledge" takes a central place in economics. This paper shows that the metaphor pervasively used in neoclassical economics to understand knowledge is that of "capital". Taking capital as a metaphor of knowledge introduces problems in neoclassical economic theory, as becomes apparent when economics addresses issues of learning and technological development. Instead, it is argued that economists could learn from what philosophers such as Gilbert Ryle and Michael Polanyi have said about how to understand knowledge.

Economists can reflect on their own field of research and themselves in a number of ways. The philosophy of science has long been the dominant way to reflect on the work of scientists, to be joined in more recent times by both the sociology of science and the rhetoric of science. In this paper I do not argue that these approaches are wrong, but I do argue that they should be complemented with a study of the individual scientist. A psychology of economists, in other words, is called for. One important theory in recent psychological literature (social learning/cognitive theory) is introduced as an instance to indicate what kind of suggestions concerning the reflective position of individual scientists might be derived. It would be preferable from this perspective that scientists set high standards for themselves, have an open mind to what happens in different disciplines, and set high standards by which to judge others. Then follows a discussion where some potential objections to the approach in general, or to the specific psychological theory in particular, are refuted.

(2000). Economics, Ethics, and Public Policy, edited by Charles K. Wilber. Feminist Economics: Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 153-157.

BY MANY COUNTS, the annual meeting of the Allied Social Science Associations (ASSA), held each year in January in one of the larger cities in the United States, is the most important conference in the world for economists. It draws the largest number of economists at any meeting, it has come to be crucial for the global labor market for economists, and it is where the most broadly based, if not the most profound, substantial discussions on economic topics are to be had. The luminaries of the discipline are hailed there, and as scholars, publishers, colleagues, and friends gather, relations are built, maintained, and, possibly, break down. Many a project starts, culminates, or is salvaged at these meetings. Beginning in the 1930s, formally it has remained somewhat amorphous, as Coats (1985: 1718) has put it, without constitution and bylaws, run mostly by the American Economic Association (AEA). The associations that have gathered underneath the umbrella that ASSA provides have changed substantially over the years, which lends credit to the belief that the lack of formal status may have given it a degree of flexibility that might not have been possible otherwise. Jane Clary in her contribution to this symposium makes the point that this flexibility allows, at least to some extent, the inclusion in the meetings of many different points of view regarding economic theory and policy. Although relations between the representatives of the different associations are largely collegial, they have, at times, also been strenuous. It is interesting to see how an earlier ASSA--the American Social Science Association, "ASSA-I," in existence between 1865 and 1909 (Dimand 2000; Haskell 1977)--has seen a plethora of disciplines come into being in the United States: sociology (ASA), history (AHA), political science (APSA), and statistitics (ASS), as well as economics (AEA) (see also Ross 1991). Academic economics has it roots in the earlier ASSA, and economics, as a discipline, came into its own in the late period of this first ASSA, as shown in Barber (1993). The topic of this symposium, ASSA(II), evolved around AEA in the late 1930s as the distinct associations began to have meetings particular to their disciplines. Developments such as these, as Michael Bernstein argues in his contribution to this symposium, as well as in his 2004 book, may be seen as attempts to professionalize the discipline, as much as Haskell (1977) and Furner (1975) have argued for earlier periods of time. Much of the success economists have had at this is in no small part due to the institution of the ASSA(II) (see Backhouse 2008). John Siegfried, executive secretary of AEA, in his piece gives some intriguing insights into the workings of this organization. The transparency with which he does so is remarkable and should give critics of the way ASSA(II) is organized cause to think. As the economy globalizes, the economics profession does also. Cooperation between individuals and organizations the world across grows (Goyal et al. 2006), and so the importance of meeting occasionally at a single location once in a while to touch base grows. ASSA has evolved into the focal point, and declining transportation costs have helped people come from afar to the United States for these meetings. A piece of wisdom that Marshall ([1890] 1982: X, IV, [section]4) has offered thus comes true: Every cheapening of the means of communication, every new facility for the free interchange of ideas between distant places alters the action of the forces which tend to localize industries . …

Consuming Symbolic Goods: Identity and Commitment - Introduction Wilfred Dolfsma. Lauding the Leisure Class: Symbolic Content and Conspicuous Consumption Alan Shipman. Consumption, Identity, and the Sociocultural Constitution of 'Preferences': Reading Women's Magazines Martha A. Star. You Are What You Eat: The Social Economy of the Slow Food Movement Bruce Pietrykowski. Consuming Values and Contested Cultures: A Critical Analysis of the UK Strategy for Sustainable Consumption and Production Gill Seyfang. Religious Identity and Consumption Metin M. Cogel and Lanse Minkler. Paradoxes of Modernist Consumption: Reading Fashions Wilfred Dolfsma. Are Unpreferred Preferences Weak in Symbolic Content? David George. The Gift Paradox: Complex Selves and Symbolic Good Elias L. Khalil. Deriving the Engel Curve: Pierre Bourdieu and the Social Critique of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Andrew B. Trigg. The Post Affluent Society Amitai Etzioni

1. General Introduction Sefan Kesting and Wilfred Dolfsma 2. Systems Theory 3. Unity of Social Sciences 4. Economics & Morality 5. Communication/Persuasion 6. Power Theory 7. Evolutionary economics 8. Institutions / Institutional Economics 9. Spaceship Earth (ecological economics) 10. Cultural Economics 11. Grant economics 12. Conflict resolution, Peace 13. Teaching Economics 14. The Future of Economics 15. Epilogue Stefan Kesting and Wilfred Dolfsma

Explanations of knowledge sharing in organizations emphasize either personality variables such as motivation or network-related structural variables such as centrality. Little empirical research examines how these two types of variables are in fact related: how do extrinsic and intrinsic motivation explain the position that an employee entertains in a knowledge sharing network within an organization? Much is to be gained from a better understanding of how, empirically, psychological variables and an organization's network interrelate (Burt et al., 1998; Kalish and Robins, 2006; Moch, 1980; Teigland and Wasko, 2009). Still, this line of enquiry is not pursued much (Foss et al., 2009). This paper integrates the structural characteristics known to be implicated in knowledge transfer typically focused on in the social network literature on the one hand, with the motivational perspective commonly identified in the organization literature. This study examines how motivation - extrinsic (expected organizational rewards, reciprocal benefits) and intrinsic (knowledge self-efficacy, enjoyment in helping others) - might explain how employees may be better connected in the full knowledge transfer network or might be engaged more in inter-unit knowledge transfer. Connectedness (closeness centrality) and inter-unit ties are well-known to contribute to knowledge transfer. Analyzing data from a survey at two large European organizations, this study, counterintuitively, shows that neither intrinsic nor extrinsic motivation explain an individual's favorable position in a knowledge transfer network. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Taking the idea that institutional reproduction is not obvious and that institutions are vulnerable has significant conceptual implications. Institutional vulnerability can arise through communication between actors in a common language. To apprehend this requires an elaboration of John Searle's (1995, 2005) argument that language is the fundamental institution. Ontologically, language delineates and circumscribes a community. A community cannot function without a common language, and language at the same time constitutes a community's boundaries, allowing for focused and effective communication within a community. Communication through language introduces ambiguity as well, however, and so institutional reproduction, mediated by language, is a deeply contentious process. Communication across boundaries may particularly "irritate" a system, as Niklas Luhmann has argued. How can institutions then be re-identified through change? Searle's general form for institutions is in need of elaboration. We develop arguments by drawing upon Luhmann's (1995) systems analysis and notion of communication.

The notion of path dependence was first explicitly applied in the field of economics, in particular to explain the persistence of certain technologies and standards (David, 1985; Arthur, 1989). It has been discussed in recent decades in other disciplines as well, and has been found to be a useful way of analyzing a range of subjects. The concept has become particularly popular in sociology and political science, often aiming to explain institutional development (Pierson, 2004; Mahoney, 2000). At the micro level of individual organizations much less use of the concept has been made so far, with the notable exception of David (1994). Only recently has the interest in this field of application expanded (e.g., Sydow et al., 2009). Applying the idea of path dependence to the analysis of organizational change raises major theoretical issues, however. We illustrate this with a re-analysis of the origin and development of the Toyota Production System.

P>Over time, economics has experienced paradigm shifts, and there is every reason to think this will continue. In economics, as in the development of technological knowledge, paradigms do not emerge from nowhere, but build on precursors, possibly from other fields. Our understanding of current economic thinking can be enhanced by paying greater attention to the role of paradigms and by using concepts such as myth, plot structure, and cultural endowment, which are typically given greater attention by literary analysts than by economists, to study paradigms. Here we argue that together these can help us better understand how ideas from other times and fields may be combined with our own to generate better research and publications, and that a greater awareness of the history of economics may well be an excellent vehicle for enhancing that understanding.

Research on institutional change has flourished ever since the debate on agency and structure moved away from the previously uncompromising positions which emphasized either agency or structure. A conceptual compromise is sought here in a focus on the processes of institutionalization, which enables us to move beyond the idea that institutions are mere mental constructs or the point of view that behaviour is the mere reproduction of institutional patterns. Contributing to an understanding of the processes of institutional change, this chapter analyses institutional change as instigated by tensions triggered by discrepancies perceived by agents between concrete institutional settings and the socio-economic values they are expected to represent. The Social Value Nexus that is presented below introduces an emphasis on the perceived legitimacy of institutions. Describing (types of) tensions between socio-cultural values and institutional settings, the chapter explores the ways in which structure, agency and values interact in processes of institutional change.

PurposeThis paper aims to provide a view and analysis of the immediate field of journals that surround a number of key heterodox economics journals.Design/methodology/approachUsing citation data from the Science and Social Science Citation Index, the individual and collective networks of a number of journals in this field are analyzed.FindingsThe size and shape of the citation networks of journals can differ substantially, even if in a broadly similar category. Heterodox economics cannot (yet) be considered as an integrated specialty: authors in several journals in heterodox economics cite more from mainstream economics than from other heterodox journals. There are also strong links with other disciplinary fields such as geography, development studies, women studies, etc.Research limitations/implicationsThe analysis is limited by its reliance on citation data in the Science and Social Science Citation Indexes provided by Thomson‐Reuters.Practical implicationsThe analysis shows not only whence journals draw their strengths, but also how knowledge between journals and neighboring sub‐fields is diffused. This can be important for editors, authors, and others.Originality/valueA network analysis not just focusing on a single journal as a focal point, but combining several journals in a single analysis enables one to visualize structural properties of the field of heterodox economics which otherwise remain latent. This study provides a structural approach to citation analysis as a tool for the study of scientific specialties.

Knowledge exchange between individuals working in a firm, across and even within divisions, does not occur automatically (Szulanski 1996). It is not obvious that people exchange ideas, point one another towards useful information or give feedback, even in the absence of any motives for not cooperating in such a manner. However, as a firm’s competitive advantage is closely related to its innovative capacity, which is largely based on how it uses knowledge that is already available, the questions that arise are: how does knowledge flow within a firm? What can be done to stimulate or re-direct knowledge flow within a firm?

By developing Searle’s (1995, 2005) argument that language is the fundamental institution, this chapter contributes to the growing institutionalist literature on the conception of the institution and the understanding of institutional change. Language is ambiguous, however, and so institutional reproduction, mediated by language, is a deeply contentious process. Moreover, ontologically, language and understanding delineate and circumscribe a community. A community cannot function without a common language, as Searle argued, but language at the same time constitutes a community’s boundaries, allowing for focused and effective communication. I develop the argument by drawing upon Luhmann’s (1995) systems analysis and notion of communication, underlining the essentially vulnerable nature of institutional continuity with change and reproduction as meaningful information crosses a system’s boundaries. This raises the question of how institutions may be recognized when they are vulnerable even when reproduced. Drawing from John Davis (2003) one may pose the questions: what differentiates institutions, and how can institutions be identified through time and space?

Original institutional economics (OIE) and new institutional economics (NIE) have differing positions on a number of issues. There is an ongoing discussion about the question of whether these categorically different positions (Hodgson 1988) are part of the same continuum (Rutherford 1994, 1995) or may even be reconciled (Groenewegen et al. 1995; Schmid 2004). These discussions tend to focus on methodological points of contention, and often draw heavily on the history of economic thought. I take a slightly different approach by analysing the phenomenon of ‘silent trade’ (ST).

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to disentangle and elaborate on the constitutive elements of the concept of path dependence (initial conditions and lock‐in) for a concerted and in‐depth application to the study of organizational change.Design/methodology/approachThe approach takes the form of a combination of a longitudinal and a comparative case‐study, based on secondary literature.FindingsExternal initial conditions acted less as “imprinting” forces than is suggested in the literature on the genesis of the Toyota production system (TPS); a firm‐specific philosophy in combination with a critical sequence of events mainly shaped and locked‐in TPS.Research limitations/implicationsThe empirical sources are limited to publications in English, so relevant factors explaining the path taken may not all have been included. The importance of a salient meta‐routine might be firm‐specific.Practical implicationsThe study contributes to understanding the factors underlying corporate performance by a critical re‐examination of a much heralded production system (TPS).Originality/valueThe paper highlights the use of the concept of meta‐routines to connect the core elements of path dependence, that is, sensitivity to initial conditions and lock‐in mechanisms.

Studies of alliances, and R&D alliances in particular, focus mostly on issues at the meso and macro levels of analysis. It may be for this reason that it remains unclear what explains their success...

This paper is included in the First Monday Special Issue: Music and the Internet, published in July 2005. Special Issue editor David Beer asked authors to submit additional comments regarding their articles. Additional author comments appear in italics and brackets in the Abstract. The music industry is [still] in a genuine maelstrom. Globalization is affecting this industry more than many other industries and it is primarily induced by developments in Information Technology. The foremost avenue for change is through the institution providing the foundation of the industry - copyright, which [may] be largely disabled. The oddly global and local structure of the music industry [,premised on copyrights, might] be undergoing some fundamental changes. The roles of music publishers and record companies especially [may be] about to alter. In an institutional economic analysis, I will analyze the present situation in this industry, where Information Technology impacts on this system, and how in general the industry is likely to change. [The original article was featured in the May of 2000 issue of First Monday - much has changed since then, but much of my original text still seems to have some validity. What may have changed, however, are the likely prospects for this industry, especially for incumbent firms.]

Feminist economics draws increasing attention from professional mainstream economists. In this paper, we discuss methodological issues, some theoretical developments – notably on the household – and issues of economic policy. We point to parallels between feminist economics and institutional economics, and argue that these relations might be strengthened to the benefit of both.

Understanding how individuals learn is of great importance to economists to understand economic phenomena as well as their own position in society. The idea that holds that people hold those views that best suit their own interest is untenable. Bayesian views on learning also miss an important point – including the Denzau and North version of Bayesian learning they call a punctuated equilibria view. The important point is that information needs to be interpreted, given meaning. What meaning people give to the information they receive depends on their experience in the past. Past experience take the form of interrelated rules of conduct. In this paper the whole of these interrelated rules is called “the mountain of experience”. This perspective allows a perception on humans in economics that combines reason, adaptation and volition. Some implications of this perspective for economics are explored.