Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 126 Download : 69

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study investigates metaphorical hybridity's role in shaping knowledge management practices within professional contexts. Metaphorical hybridity refers to blending diverse metaphorical representations that influence knowledge creation, organization, and dissemination within organizations. This research aims to understand how metaphorical hybridity impacts the development of novel knowledge management strategies. Q methodology was employed to analyze the metaphorical representations that shape knowledge management practices. Participants` rank-order statements related to metaphorical hybridity and knowledge management enabled the identification of common viewpoints and distinct perspectives. Key metaphorical constructs include knowledge as a fluid entity, an organic system, and a complex network. The context is the rapidly evolving knowledge landscape in professional environments, presenting challenges to effective knowledge management practices. The rise of digital technologies and globalization has further complicated knowledge management, necessitating innovative strategies. Findings demonstrate metaphorical hybridity's dynamic nature and its potential to foster adaptability, innovation, and resilience in knowledge management practices. The research highlights the importance of understanding the interplay between diverse perspectives, representations, and knowledge management approaches. Implications include recognizing metaphorical hybridity's influence for harnessing diverse metaphors' power more effectively and the practical adaptability to the changing knowledge landscape and address complex challenges associated with managing knowledge in contemporary professional environments.

Keywords

Knowledge Management Metaphorical Hybridity Professional Contexts Q Methodology Subjective Perspectives

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

In submitting the manuscript to the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

License and Copyright Agreement

Authors who publish with FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
How to Cite
Roozafzai, Z. S. (2025). Metaphorical Hybridity in Knowledge Management. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(2), 103-120. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v6i2.217
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Alvesson, M. (1993). Organizations as rhetoric: Knowledge-intensive firms and the struggle with ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies, 30(6), 997-1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1993.tb00311.x
  2. Andriessen, D. (2006). On the metaphorical nature of intellectual capital: a textual analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 7 (1). 93-110. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930610639796
  3. Andriessen, D., & Boom, M.V. (2009). In search of alternative metaphors for knowledge; Inspiration from symbolism. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(4), pp397-404.In search of alternative metaphors for knowledge; Inspiration from symbolism. https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/860
  4. Andriessen, D. (2010, March). The aptness of knowledge related metaphors: a research agenda. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Intellectual Capital (pp. 59-66). Academic Publishing Limited, Reading.
  5. Argyris, C. (1977). Organizational learning and management information systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2 (2), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(77)90029-9
  6. Bielenia-Grajewska, M. (2018). Knowledge Management From the Metaphorical Perspective. In M. Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Fourth Edition (pp. 5085-5092). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch441
  7. Bies, W. (1996). Thinking with the help of images : On the metaphors of knowledge organization. Knowl.Org. 23(1996)No . 1 , p.3-8, 28 https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-1996-1-3
  8. Biscaro, C., Bruni, E., Cornelissen, J., & Oswick, C. (2025). Metaphor and Organization Studies: Going beyond resonance to further theory and practice. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406251314572 https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ossa/0/0
  9. Barbosa, A.M. (2020). What’s in a Hybrid? Framing, Meaning, and Symbols in Hybrid Organizing. Academy of Management Journal (Proceedings), Vol. 2020, No. 1. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.20690abstract https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.20690abstract
  10. Barrett, F. J., Thomas, G. F., & Hocevar, S. P. (1995). The central role of discourse in large-scale change: A social construction perspective. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(3), 352–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886395313007
  11. Bertacchini, F., Santi, S., & Ratti, C. (2016). Metaphors and organizations: The contribution of rhetorical figures in fostering creativity within entrepreneurial groups. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(3), 364-374. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12185
  12. Bratianu, C (2023). Knowledge Dynamics: Exploring its Meanings and Interpretations. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 11(2), Sciendo, 2023, pp. 100-111. https://doi.org/10.2478/mdke-2023-0007
  13. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198-213. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.2.198.10116
  14. Cornelissen, J. P., Oswick, C., Christensen, L. T., & Phillips, N. (2008). Metaphor in organizational research: Context, modalities and implications for research introduction. Organization Studies, 29 (1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607086634
  15. Cornelissen, J. P. (2004). Beyond compare: Metaphor in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 30 (4), 751–764. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.18378876 https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amr.2005.18378876
  16. Gberardi, S. (2000). Where Learning is: Metaphors and Situated Learning in a Planning Group. Human Relations, 53(8), 1057-1080. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700538002 (Original work published 2000)
  17. Itkin, H. & Nagy, M. (2014). Theoretical and practical use of metaphors in organizational development and beyond. Pannon Management Review 3(4), 37-72. http://pmr.uni-pannon.hu/articles/3_4_itkin_nagy.pdf
  18. Jakubik, M. (2007). Exploring the knowledge landscape: four emerging views of knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11, 6-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270710762675
  19. Koller, V. (2004). Business Media on Mergers and Acquisitions: Metaphors of Evolutionary Struggle. In: Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511286_5
  20. Koller, V. (2005). Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: evidence from business media discourse. Discourse & Society, 16, 199 - 224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505049621
  21. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of Organization. Sage Publications.
  22. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
  23. Phillips, N. (1995). Telling organizational tales: On the role of narrative fiction in the study of organizations. Organization Studies, 16(4), 625-649. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600403
  24. Roozafzai, Z. S. (2021). From knowledge to power: A knowledge-based model of development. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Cultural Studies, 16(1), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-008X/CGP/v16i01/61-73
  25. Schultze, U., & Leidner, D.E. (2002). Studying Knowledge Management in Information Systems Resarch: Discourses and Theoretical Assumptions. MIS Q., 26, 213-242. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132331
  26. Steen, G. (2011). The language of knowledge management: A linguistic approach to metaphor analysis. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28(2), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.1087
  27. Torp, M.S. (2018). Metaphors in Organization, Heath, R.L. & Johansen, W. (Eds), The International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communication in (s.1-5). Boston: Wiley-Blackwell, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi: 10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0110.
  28. Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organizational knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 973-993. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00268
  29. Van Engen, R.B. (2008). Metaphor: A Multifaceted Literary Device used by Morgan and Weick to Describe Organizations. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 1(1), 39-51. https://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/elj/issue1/ELJ_V1Is1_VanEngen.pdf
  30. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
  31. Wittink, J. W. G. J. F. (2011). Reliable metaphor analysis in organizational research: towards a dual dynamic approach. In OLKC 2011 - Making Waves (pp. 1-18) http://www2.hull.ac.uk/hubs/pdf/ID%20239%20Wittink%20J.pdf