East is East, and West is West, and (n)ever its intellectual capital shall meet
| Date | 23 October 2007 |
| Published date | 23 October 2007 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930710830800 |
| Pages | 641-652 |
| Author | Daniel Andriessen,Marien van den Boom |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance,HR & organizational behaviour,Information & knowledge management |
East is East, and West is West,
and (n)ever its intellectual capital
shall meet
Daniel Andriessen and Marien van den Boom
Centre for Research in Intellectual Capital, INHOLLAND University, Diemen,
The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to start a dialogue about the differences between Western and
Eastern cultures in the way they conceptualize knowledge, and to discuss the implications of these
differences for global intellectual capital (IC) theory and practice.
Design/methodology/approach – A systematic metaphor analysis of the concept of knowledge
and IC is used to identify common Western conceptualizations of knowledge in the IC literature, and is
combined with a review of philosophical knowledge conceptualizations in the main streams of Asian
philosophy.
Findings – Basic differences were found in the way knowledge is conceptualized. In Western IC
literature, common metaphors for knowledge include knowledge as a thing and knowledge as capital.
In Asian thought, knowledge is seen as unfolding truth based upon a unity of universe and human self
and of knowledge and action.
Research limitations/implications – Western conceptualizations of knowledge, embedded in
terms like intellectual capital and knowledge management, cannot be transferred to Asian business
without considering the local view on knowledge. Asian conceptualizations of knowledge should play
an important role in the further development of a knowledge-based theory and practice of the firm.
Originality/value – Western IC theorists will have to be cautious of monopolizing their thesis as a
universal theory of IC. There is a need for cultural differentiation also regarding IC, as the
conceptualization of knowledge is always featured by the main trends in a philosophical tradition.
Keywords Knowledge management, Intellectual capital,Culture, Philosophy, Metaphors
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
The resource-based view (Hamel and Prahalad, 1994; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990) and
the knowledge-based view of the firm (Grant, 1996) have firmly positioned knowledge
as the key resource of modern organizations. “In an economy where the only certainty
is uncertainty, the sure source of lasting competitive advantage is knowledge” (Nonaka
and Takeuchi, 1995). However, knowledge is an abstract concept. It has no direct
referent in the real world. To make it comprehensible, we use metaphor to map
elements of things we are familiar with in the real world (organisms, resources,
products) onto the concept of knowledge (Andriessen, 2006). Knowledge is not a
concept that has a clearly delineated structure. Whatever structure it has it gets
through metaphor. Different people from different cultures use different metaphors to
conceptualize knowledge. They may be using the same word; however, this word can
refer to totally different understandings of the concept of knowledge.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1469-1930.htm
East is East, and
West is West
641
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 8 No. 4, 2007
pp. 641-652
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/14691930710830800
To continue reading
Request your trial