I will pay for the following essay Towards a Socio-Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer. The essay is to be 6 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.Download

I will pay for the following essay Towards a Socio-Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer. The essay is to be 6 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.

They then introduce what they term a socio-cognitive model, which the authors believe eliminates the pitfalls of the prior two concepts. In reviewing the field of knowledge transfer they point out that the positivist concept infers that the knowledge itself is within the text or another medium of transport and that the only issue is the successful decoding of that knowledge to ‘intelligible and univocal knowledge transfer.’ (Ringberg and Reihlen2008: 913). The belief here is that knowledge is a fixed quantity not open to interpretation and that, ‘knowledge-sharing practices depend on knowledge assets, the richness of communication channels, and the absorptive capacity of the receiving units.’ (Ringberg and Reihlen 2008: 913) In regards to the social constructionist theory, ‘knowledge is socially produced and defined through its social usage. words take on meaning within the context of ongoing practices and relationships’ (Ringberg and Reihlen 2008: 913). ...

For instance, they believe that ‘there is an important difference between knowing how to do something and knowing why something is done.’ (Ringberg and Reihlen 2008: 917). And that while practice is important to embedding knowledge transfer this theory ignores the necessary synchronization of the tremendous amount of knowledge that both the sender and receiver must have in common in order that the message can be conveyed as accurately as possible in order to absorb the meaning of the practice. The disembodied notion of knowledge in positivism and social constructionism is increasingly being questioned (e.g. Cobb, 2000. DeGrandpre, 2000. Garud and Rappa, 1994. Ginsberg, 1994. Reich, 2000. Sutter, 1999. Tryphon and Voneche, 1996). DeGrandpre (2000), for example, argues that it is when a person experiences the consequences of his or her actions in an ecological context that the possibility of new meaning arises. That is, the relation of the cognizing mind and culture is considered mutually complementary and coevolving because the development of either part depends not only on the other but also is made possible through the productive existence of the other (see also Heinrich, 2004. Vogel, 2000). (Ringberg and Reihlen 2008: 919) Ringberg and Reihlen purport that their socio-cognitive model corrects these problems and incorporates other details that enhance the uptake of knowledge transfer. They believe that these earlier theories view knowledge as a pure and disembodied conception that is not applicable to the real world use of information and perception. The authors state that, ‘…when a person experiences the consequences of his or her actions in an ecological context that the possibility of new meaning arises.