ScholarGate
어시스턴트

방법 비교

선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.

지식 경영 역량 척도×혁신 양면성 척도×
분야전략경영전략경영
계열Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
기원 연도19951991
창시자Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi (SECI model); adapted by organizational scholarsJames G. March
유형Organizational self-report questionnaireOrganizational self-report questionnaire
원전Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press. link ↗March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. DOI ↗
별칭KM Capability Scale, Knowledge Management Maturity ScaleAmbidexterity Scale, Exploration-Exploitation Scale
관련55
요약Knowledge Management (KM) refers to the organizational capacity to create, capture, organize, and apply knowledge to improve organizational effectiveness, innovation, and decision-making. Nonaka and Takeuchi's (1995) knowledge-creating company framework conceptualized knowledge as moving through four conversion modes: socialization (tacit to tacit knowledge transfer through experience), externalization (tacit knowledge articulation into explicit forms), combination (explicit knowledge assembly into systems), and internalization (explicit knowledge absorption into tacit understanding). This scale measures organizational capability across the four KM processes—knowledge creation, capture, sharing, and application—revealing where organizations excel or struggle in converting information into competitive advantage.Innovation Ambidexterity—the organizational capacity to simultaneously engage in exploration (pursuing radical, novel innovations) and exploitation (improving and extending existing products and processes)—is fundamental to sustained competitive advantage. March (1991) formalized this trade-off in Organization Science, arguing that organizations must balance the two to survive and thrive. Exploration alone leads to variety but insufficient returns; exploitation alone leads to competence traps and vulnerability to disruption. This scale, operationalized by He and Wong (2004) and extended by Jansen et al. (2006), measures organizational capability in both domains and the degree to which firms balance competing innovation imperatives.
ScholarGate데이터셋
  1. v1
  2. 3 출처
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 출처
  3. PUBLISHED

검색으로 이동 슬라이드 다운로드

ScholarGate방법 비교: Knowledge Management Capability Scale · Innovation Ambidexterity Scale. 2026-06-18에 다음에서 검색함: https://scholargate.app/ko/compare