This study explores the premise that knowledge in new product development proves both a barrier to and a source of innovation. To understand the problematic nature of knowledge and the boundaries that result, an ethnographic study was used to understand how knowledge is structured differently across the four primary functions that are dependent on each other in the creation and production of a high-volume product. A pragmatic view of “knowledge in practice ” is developed, describing knowledge as localized, embedded, and invested within a function and how, when working across functions, consequences often arise that generate problematic knowledge boundaries. The use of a boundary object is then described as a means of representing, learning about, and transforming knowledge to resolve the consequences that exist at a given boundary. Finally, this pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries is proposed as a framework to revisit the differentiation and integration of knowledge.

Data is more than knowledge: implications of the reversed knowledge hierarchy for knowledge management and organizational memory In knowledge management literature it is often pointed out that it is important to distinguish between data, information and knowledge. The generally accepted view sees data as simple facts that become information as data is combined into meaningful structures, which subsequently become knowledge as meaningful information is put into a context and when it can be used to make predictions. This view sees data as a prerequisite for information, and information as a prerequisite for knowledge. In this paper, I will explore the conceptual hierarchy of data, information and knowledge, showing that data emerges only after we have information, and that information emerges only after we already have knowledge. The reversed hierarchy of knowledge is shown to lead to a different approach in developing information systems that support knowledge management and organizational memory. It is also argued that this difference may have major implications for organizational flexibility and renewal. 2

This paper presents a new unifying theme for design theory by emphasizing the importance of context . We arrive at our conclusions by examining and then criticizing the legitimacy of universal methods in design upon which the critical importance of context emerges. The collaborative aspects of design focuses attention on the conception of shared meaning. We introduce and elaborate the concept of shared memory as the embodiment both of context and of shared meaning. Using the concept of shared memory in vertical and horizontal forms, within and between disciplines respectively, we both account for past observations of design in practice and recommend actions to improve design in the future. We examine several practical implications of the growing importance of shared memory in industrial firms and for design teams. We then consider and recommend specific research programs which will help designers capture and make better use of this critical resource.

I use the example of the 2000 US Presidential election to show that political controversies with technical underpinnings are not resolved by technical means. Then, drawing from examples such as climate change, genetically modified foods, and nuclear waste disposal, I explore the idea that scientific inquiry is inherently and unavoidably subject to becoming politicized in environmental controversies. I discuss three reasons for this. First, science supplies contesting parties with their own bodies of relevant, legitimated facts about nature, chosen in part because they help make sense of, and are made sensible by, particular interests and normative frameworks. Second, competing disciplinary approaches to understanding the scientific bases of an environmental controversy may be causally tied to competing value-based political or ethical positions. The necessity of looking at nature through a variety of disciplinary lenses brings with it a variety of normative lenses, as well. Third, it follows from the foregoing that scientific uncertainty, which so often occupies a central place in environmental controversies, can be understood not as a lack of scientific understanding but as the lack of coherence among competing scientific understandings, amplified by the various political, cultural, and institutional contexts within which science is carried out. In light of these observations, I briefly explore the problem of why some types of political controversies become “scientized ” and others do not, and conclude that the value bases of disputes underlying environmental controversies must be fully articulated and adjudicated through political means before science can play an effective role in resolving environmental problems.

For the current youth generation, the Internet has always existed. Online technologies have profoundly contributed to a dramatic techocultural shift in contemporary society, transforming how we learn, work, play, and socialize. Information from multiple sources on everything from Athabascan birch bark baskets to the calculation of z-scores is there for the googling. Global social networks – made visible, designable, and searchable via services such as “Friendster ”

Complex living systems are difficult to understand. They obey the laws of physics and chemistry, but these basic laws do not explain their behaviour; each component part of a complex system participates in many different interactions and these interactions generate unforeseeable, emergent properties. For example, microscopic interactions between nonliving molecules, at the macroscopic level, produce a living cell. Here we discuss how to explain such complexity in the format of a dynamic model that is mathematically precise, yet understandable. Precise, computer-aided modelling will make it easier to formulate novel experiments and attain understanding and control of key biological processes.

While engineering programs must continue to cover the maximum breadth and depth of content information possible, these programs can also take an active role in encouraging and fostering additional dispositions to help their graduates adapt to their professional career. We define an adaptive expert as an individual who possesses the content knowledge of an expert, but who in addition displays specific cognitive dispositions that augment and enhance their ability to effectively utilize and extend their content knowledge. We have identified four main constructs (multiple perspectives, metacognition, goals and beliefs, and epistemology) which form the foundation of adaptive expertise. We report on a survey developed to measure these qualities of adaptiveness in three target engineering populations (freshmen, senior, and faculty). We also present preliminary interview data conducted in conjunction with the survey to provide insight as to how this adaptiveness is manifest in undergraduate engineering students.

This research examines how representational gestures (Kita 2000), made by scientists during collaborative discussion in a biochemistry lab, are used in formulating scientific theory. By analyzing digital video of lab meetings and interviews, we find that representational gestures are frequently used to reference, modify, and embody portions of existing material structure such as models, diagrams, and graphs. Representational gestures appear to play a significant role in how scientists both conceptualize and communicate theories. We believe that representational gestures operate as instantiations of essential spatio-dynamic features that are not efficiently conveyed in other modalities, like language and graphical representations, and, as such, are essential resources for shaping theoretical understandings when used in collaborative, face-to-face activity. Gestures may also serve to align cognitive processes in a “community of practice ” (Lave 1991) and can package theoretical conjectures into a single semiotic form that can be used symbolically to evoke a rich, shared conceptual history. We use a theoretical framework

Ulrich Beck and other theorists of reflexive modernization are allies in the general project to reduce technocracy and elitism by rendering decision making more democratic and robust. However, this study of U.S. climate politics reveals complexities and obstacles to the sort of democratized decision making envisioned by such theorists. Since the early 1990s, the U.S. public has been subjected to numerous media-driven campaigns to shape understandings of this widely perceived threat. Political interests have instigated an important part of these campaigns, frequently resorting to ethically problematic tactics to undermine attempts at policy action designed to avert or reduce the threat. The disproportionate influence of such interests suggests the need for a more level political playing field characterized by more equalized access to power and influence. Keywords: climate change; controversy; democracy; expertise; technocracy; U.S. conservative movement; reflexive modernization Again and again, like a mantra, we heard calls for “sound science ” from Members [of U.S. Congress] who had little or no experience of what science does and how it progresses. —Brown (1996, ii) AUTHOR’S NOTE: This article has benefited from insightful commentaries from numerous friends and colleagues. I especially want to thank Michael M. J. Fischer, Dale Jamieson, Sheila Jasanoff, Roger Pielke Jr., and two anonymous reviewers for the care and time they put into reading and commenting on this manuscript at various stages of its development. Their comments

Abstract: In the inaugural issue of this journal, David Tyfield (2008) used some recent discussions about “meaning finitism ” to conclude that the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) is an intellectually hopeless basis on which to erect an intelligible study of science. In contrast, the authors show that Tyfield’s argument rests on some profound misunderstandings of the SSK. They show that his mischaracterization of SSK is in fact systematic and is based on lines of argument that are at best incoherent.