1
BEYOND THE KNOWLEDGE WORK COGNITIVE PROCESS
MODEL: AN ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION USES IN
DIFFERENT WORK ENVIRONMENTS
AUTHORES: Luiz Henrique Boff, Norberto Hoppen e Jairo Laser Procianoy
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a knowledge work cognitive process model which is based on four major
elements: information environment, input stimuli, cognitive process, and output results. It
integrates previous conceptual frameworks with a cognitive dimension. The model is
analyzed by an information use approach, which is related to three different work
environments of knowledge workers - R&D workers, corporate lawyers, and securities
analysts - and their work process and compares them with the proposed model. Despite the
distinct information needs and uses in these different work environments, we found some
similarities as well, such as the integration of internal and external information. The analysis
also indicates a strong relationship between cognitive process and knowledge.
1 INTRODUCTION
The nature of the working environment in organizations has changed from the ability to
generate products to the competence to manage knowledge effectively. The wealth of
organizations is less dependent on the property of material resources and its control and more
dependent on the information quality, specialist knowledge, and organizational competencies
(Prahalad and Hamel, 1990; Stewart, 1993).
Research today places increasing emphasis on depicting knowledge work in organizational
environments (Blackler, 1995). This focus is reflected in subjects such as organizational
learning (e.g., Argyris and Schon, 1978), technological change (e.g., Zuboff, 1988), and
knowledge-intensive firms (e.g., Alvesson, 1993).
Research and practice concerning with the knowledge work process try to identify means of
enhancing the productivity of knowledge workers by mapping the stimuli occurring in the
external environment and linking them to the external observable outputs of the knowledge
worker. The main assumption is that prudent manipulation of the external environment will
result in greater productivity outputs. That is the conception of the previous research (Davis et
al., 1991; Thomas and Schmidt, 1992). However, it is essential to consider the internal
cognitive processes which the knowledge workers undertake in order to provide meaning and
hence the stimulus for those actions which are externally observable.
Three major objectives of this paper are to understand the nature of the knowledge work
cognitive process, to establish the relationship between cognitive processes and knowledge
focusing on the use of information and to present contributions to the improvement of the
knowledge work cognitive process. Therefore, a knowledge work cognitive process model,
based on four major elements - information environment, input stimuli, cognitive process, and
output results - is developed. The model is analyzed by an information use approach.
This paper proceeds as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical background. Next, it
describes three examples of knowledge workers’ activities: research and development (R&D)
workers, corporate lawyers and securities analysts. Section 4 analyses the relation between
2
the proposed model and knowledge workers’ activities. Last section presents the conclusion
of the paper with comments for the improvement of the knowledge work cognitive process.
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Research on knowledge work is directed at understanding the nature of knowledge work and
how outcomes may be improved (Davis et al., 1991). The purpose of this section is to present
a comprehensive definition of knowledge work and previous conceptual models of the
knowledge work process. In addition, an alternative model is proposed in order to consider
the cognitive process as a key element of the knowledge work.
2.1 Definition of the knowledge work
Knowledge work is a complex, unstructured, nonroutine, and knowledge-intensive process
which depends on the human cognitive capacity. Knowledge work can be considered as a
process which requires knowledge from both internal and external sources to generate
information-based products.
Davis et al. (1991) establish a more specific definition:
“Knowledge work consists of one or more tasks involving human information
processing in which the dominant activities
•
•
•
•
are expected to generate useful information,
depend on knowledge accessible by the individuals performing the task,
employ a mental model of process and output, and
require significant attentional information processing.” (Davis et al., 1991, p.13-14)
Knowledge workers perform activities such as research, product development, advertising,
consulting, planning, and so on (Davenport et al., 1996). Their tasks are based on constant
decision making and intellectual skilled activities.
2.2 Previous models of knowledge work process 1
The knowledge work research is recent and its primary objective is to increase the task
productivity of knowledge workers.
Two conceptual models of the knowledge work process have contributed to this field: they
can be called University of Minnesota model (Davis et al., 1991) and USACERL2 model
(Thomas and Schmidt, 1992). Both of them are based on classical human information
processing models (Newell & Simon, 1972; McComick, 1976) which reflect the primary
functions of human/machine systems as those of inputting of information (stimulus) from the
environment, processing of information within the limited processing and storage capabilities
of humans and outputting (responses) to the environment.
The Minnesota model describes a conceptual framework for research on productivity within
the knowledge work field (Davis et al., 1991). The model is based on a classical
1
2
A complete review and analysis of the knowledge work models can be found in Boff and Cox, 1996.
United States Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories.
3
representation of a system environment that has inputs, processes and outputs. The system is
the environmental context where the knowledge work is performed, including all that is
outside of the individual knowledge worker, such as organizational definitions of tasks, task
processes, and goals, as well as expected outcomes, reward systems, and time and other
resource constraints. There are three major inputs which are the knowledge work sources:
task characteristics, personal resources, and information resources. The knowledge work
process itself is the process by which a knowledge worker functions in working toward
completion of the goal. This process consists of the three constructs: work management, task
motivation, and task execution. Finally, the output consists of task outcomes which are the
external results of the knowledge work process such as decisions, analyses, reports, and
physical products.
The USACERL model is similar to the Minnesota model in its theoretical background, but it
is based on the psychology stimulus-organism-response paradigm (McComick, 1976). The
emphasis upon this model is on defining the role of knowledge workers as professionals. It
views the tasks of professional knowledge workers as collecting information (pre-requisite
information), analyzing or otherwise adding value to the information (analysis), and
producing further information (product).
As such these models concentrate on describing the relative productivity levels of knowledge
workers as observed in some tangible “product” resulting from various “inputs”. Their
primary concern is thus with describing the relationship between inputs and outputs and the
effect of manipulation of the former to produce an improvement in the latter. The Minnesota
model, for example, examines the effect of task characteristics, personal resources, and
information resources on outcomes and measures of performance. The USACERL model on
the other hand takes as its input institutional knowledge and once again is concerned with the
effect of this input on productivity outputs.
Two limitations of these models can be mentioned. First, in both models the cognitive process
of knowledge workers and its ability to influence outcomes have not been sufficiently
explored. Second, these models represent the knowledge work process as an unidirectional
and linear process. Attention is not given to the dynamic nature of the interaction among
cognitive processing, environmental context and outcomes, where internal knowledge
processing may precede and influence input, and similarly outputs may influence internal
knowledge processing.
2.3 The knowledge work cognitive process model
The conceptual model of the knowledge work process proposed in this paper extends the
Minnesota and USACERL models including the cognitive processing of the knowledge
worker and considering the dynamic nature of the whole process. Cognitive process is
considered a set of strategies for using information to perform knowledge work tasks.
The model emphasizes the importance of including cognitive processes because (a)
knowledge workers need to manage information (searching, acquiring, processing,
interpreting, and storing) to develop their activities and to produce some results (knowledge
and product); (b) intellectual capabilities are fundamental to perform knowledge work tasks;
and (c) the output of knowledge work is more than a product; the work process generates
knowledge which may be stored as new knowledge inside the knowledge workers and as new
information in the information resources that they can use forwards.
4
This model focuses cognitive process as a key component to improve knowledge work.
Davenport et al. (1996) evidence that knowledge workers have high autonomy in how and
when they perform work activities. Then, their cognitive abilities influence the work process
and, as a consequence, the outcomes are affected and new stimuli are produced to inputs. This
sequence represents the dynamic nature of the cognitive process.
The components of the knowledge work cognitive process model are depicted in Figure 1 and
are briefly described below.
Information Environment
Inputs
Cognitive Process
Task
Characteristics
Information
Characteristcs
Knowledge
Work Process
Knowledge
Worker
Resources
Product
Information
Management
Task
Management
Information
Resources
Outcomes
Knowledge
Figure 1. The knowledge work cognitive process model
Information Environment
The information environment is only a representation of the external environment (Huber and
Daft, 1987). However, it is the component more accessible to create a representation of the
whole context. The work process takes place in the information environment through the
acquisition and processing of the information and generation of results. Information from the
external environment will be used in different ways by knowledge workers depending on their
purpose. For example, knowledge workers use information to make decisions, to solve
problems or to generate new ideas.
5
Inputs
The inputs are the components which establish the stimuli to perform the knowledge work.
There are three major components: task characteristics, information characteristics, and
information resources.
•
Task Characteristics. Each task has a set of characteristics that differentiates it from other
tasks (Davis et al., 1991). These include elements of the task such as the number of
distinct activities needed and the time available to perform the task, the level of
specification, and structure afforded to the task, the relationship between task inputs and
products and task significance.
•
Information Characteristics. The information possesses a set of elements such as volume,
validity, certainty, scarcity, accessibility, and format. There are clear implications for the
effect of information characteristics on cognitive processing. The most pertinent, which
have the potential to effect cognitive processing, are described below. These elements
might also measure the value of information.
a) Information volume. The academic literature widely reports the effects of information
volume, in particular that of overload on the individual’s processing capabilities (e.g.,
O’Reilly, 1980; Schick et al., 1990).
b) Information ambiguity. The information in itself may be ambiguous, and hence not
necessarily capable of being consistently interpreted by different individuals, giving
rise to potential sources of confusion.
c) Incomplete information. This results in the necessity for knowledge workers to
supplement the information, either through their own cognitive resources or by seeking
alternative external suppliers of pertinent information.
d) Information uncertainty. This is frequently defined as a knowledge inadequacy
(Montagna, 1980) which may arise from several sources. The result of uncertainty
may be the individual’s inability to predict correctly. Again there is a requirement
placed on knowledge workers to seek additional or supporting information to reduce
uncertainty.
e) Information complexity. Complexity is related to the number of decision alternatives
and the amount of information about them (Payne, 1976). Information complexity may
lead to cognitive overload resulting in confusion and uncertainty on the part of the
knowledge worker.
•
Information resources. These are the technologies, methodologies, and techniques to
process and add value to information and the information itself. They are devices that
collect, store, distribute, and organize data.
There is an important distinction between information resources and information. The former
is a set of tools addressed to storing, processing, communicating, and analyzing information
(Bakopoulos et al., 1985). The latter are data which, when manipulated by information
resources, change the apprehension or view about available alternatives (King et al., 1989).
Information does not depreciate its value rather than technological resources which quickly
becomes obsolescent. The more potential uses and generation of different meanings of
information, the higher its value.
6
Cognitive process
In this model emphasis is placed on individuals’ cognition processes and distinguishes
between information management and task management in the knowledge work process
which should not be considered synonymous. Cognition occurs prior to encountering
information and continues after its consumption. That is, the process starts with the selection
and integration of inputs, it continues with the processing of selected information, and then
generates the outcomes. The resultant products are new information in the form of both
information resources and information itself.
•
Knowledge Worker Resources. These include the characteristics of the knowledge
workers such as their cognitive capacity, level of expertise, domain knowledge, time
availability, objectives, personal traits, and beliefs. Although knowledge worker resources
can be considered as input, this component acts throughout the knowledge work process.
It functions as an integrative agent between the inputs and knowledge work process.
•
Knowledge work process. Information and task management are the components of the
knowledge work process. They cannot be divided in terms of time and space, because they
are performed with intense interrelation. The information and task management are parts
of a dual process of knowledge work. However, the information and task characteristics
are different and they demand different cognitive processing.
a) Information Management. It reflects the cognitive processes taking place within the
knowledge workers, in other words, how workers identify, select, manage, interpret,
and transform the information available according to their particular requirements. It
requires attentional information processing, that is, a conscious mental attention and
effort.
b) Task management. It is the external manifestation of knowledge workers’ efforts to
facilitate cognitive processing, including the planning, execution and monitoring of the
task. It requires physical information processing (external actions) and automatic
processing (internal knowledge that invokes little or no conscious mental attention and
effort).
Task management and information management require fundamentally different skills from
the knowledge workers. For information management, knowledge workers require the
appropriate intellectual capabilities to identify and manipulate the information in an effective
manner. Task management on the other hand requires knowledge of the technology in order
to efficiently manage and execute tasks.
This has important implications for the knowledge work process in that information
management drives task management and therefore it cannot be ignored in models of
knowledge work process. In order for these models to be complete they require some
representation of the cognitive processes taking place within the knowledge workers.
Outcomes
The knowledge work cognitive process model extends the potential outcomes of the
knowledge work process from that of product to that of knowledge.
•
Product. It is based on the same classification proposed by Davis et al. (1991). Product is
the observable result of the knowledge work process, such as a decision, plan, report, or
7
other tangible output. However, the value of the knowledge work product is assessed by
its information content.
•
Knowledge. It is the information that was processed and interpreted by the knowledge
workers and it is now incorporated in their mental models. Knowledge is acquired by
learning, whether a new information is added to an existing model (maintenance) or it
transforms an old model into a new one (construction).
The representation of cognitive processes is addressed here as a key issue. It is held that not
only the cognitive process itself must be represented but also the interactive process which
takes place between cognitive processing, inputs and outputs. Such an approach allows for the
potential of cognitive processing to affect both inputs and outputs. It accommodates the
notion of the knowledge workers as not merely intermediary agents of information but also as
being proactives in the process of managing information in terms of choice of mechanisms for
the search, acquisition, processing and producing of information. In addition, it extends the
potential output of the knowledge process from a closely defined product to useful
knowledge.
3. THREE EXAMPLES OF KNOWLEDGE WORKER’S TASKS
The typical tasks of three different knowledge workers - R&D workers, corporate lawyers and
securities analysts - are presented in this section. The data to describe the tasks has been
collected using interviews and direct observation of their work environment. Special attention
was given to the information gathered (internal and external), the information-related
activities performed (search, selection, processing, interpreting), and the outputs produced
(decisions, analyses, reports, plans, schedules, products, legal forms). These tasks constitute
the basis of analysis of the information use in the knowledge work cognitive process model.
3.1 R&D workers
R&D workers normally generate product and process innovations. They typically engage in
three major types of job-related tasks, namely research of new opportunities, development of
these new opportunities and management of different projects.
When performing research tasks R&D workers need to cope with a large volume of
information gathered from several and mainly external sources (technical reports,
newspapers, scientific and technical journals, etc.) which is then reduced to relevant
information needed to develop products and processes by intelligence activities. Information
resources are information scanning methods, database tools, and electronic communication
resources. The outputs produced are memos, reports and technical drawings. Development
tasks include activities such as planning products or processes in more details. Important
information resources are computer assisted design tools and test protocols. Some results are
technical drawings, product prototypes, and technical specifications of processes. R&D
workers typically work in teams assigned to projects. Project management involve the
organization of humans, machines and materials, schedule of all activities, and coordination
of the projects in which the R&D workers and their assistants are involved. The relevant
information is obtained from internal sources (schedules, inventory) and mainly processed by
8
project management and electronic mail systems. Examples of outputs produced are memos,
schedules, reports, and supply orders.
3.2 Corporate Lawyers
Corporate lawyers are professionals who have to fulfill a task requested by managers of their
company. The typical work environment is formed by the operations of the company and their
legal implications. Normally they work in a team of lawyers and legal assistants but a
substantial portion of their work is performed individually.
After receiving the requested task (input), usually a legal problem, lawyers have to study a
solution or to prepare a legal opinion (output). They have to go through a set of laws, judicial
decisions and other legal opinions, as well as documents and personal contacts, in order to
consolidate ideas, build a framework from the situation and prepare their own point of view.
Typical information resources are word processing, legal databases, and information systems
of the company. If they work with other professionals, they discuss with them, ask for
comments, spend some time analyzing and then issue their own and individual final product.
3.3 Securities Analysts
Securities analysts work in investment banking firms and their primary activity is examining
and evaluating individual companies to develop value from securities, distinguishing the
overpriced securities from underpriced ones in the marketplace. Securities analysts share
information through a network which is present in the securities environment. The analysis of
a particular company can start from the analysts themselves, but they also receive requests
from portfolio managers, traders, and investors. Despite their collaborative work, securities
analysts perform most of their tasks individually.
The workflow of securities analysis is composed by information gathering, processing and
interpreting, and research report generation. These activities require knowledge-intensive
skills.
Securities analysts use information to scan the business environment. They must be aware of
macro economy, government policy, and legal rules and laws in order to determine their
effect on the companies they analyze. They gather relevant and reliable information from the
market (consulting, research), industry (reports, specialized literature), and the company
under evaluation (statements, personal contacts). They must understand the management of
the companies they analyze. They process and interpret the information in order to make
sense of the analysis. Important information resources are filtering tools, spreadsheets, equity
valuation models, and what-if scenarios. Finally, they write research reports to establish stock
recommendations and estimate earnings forecasts.
4. KNOWLEDGE WORK COGNITIVE PROCESS IN ACTION
This section analyses the three different types of knowledge workers (section 3) using the
conceptual model proposed (item 2.3). The model tries to establish how knowledge workers
use the information to guide their activities. Four key elements deal with the information use
of the knowledge workers: information environment, inputs, cognitive process, and outcomes.
9
Special attention is given to knowledge workers resources, which function as a link between
inputs and cognitive process.
Information Environment
There are three relevant aspects to consider in this element. First, the information
environment represents the organizational setting. Each type of organization (industry,
structure, size, management style, etc.) affect differently the way information takes place and
is used. Second, the information is central to minimize uncertainty and ambiguity originated
by a required task. Third, there is an information flow continuum in the environment.
Knowledge workers send and receive information in their work setting.
In the R&D context, information is shared all the time to keep the team members aware of the
projects. Their information environment contains a wide range of information, often loosely
related to the object of investigation. The selection and use of relevant information are key
issues to improve R&D workers’ creativity in order to develop innovative projects. Corporate
lawyers are continuously confronted with uncertain situations and problems to solve.
Generally, they deal with concrete situations in a reactive way. The problem is recognized
and the solution depends on the information acquisition and interpretation. They interact with
internal and external sources of information, sometimes listening opposite versions or points
of view about a situation. Securities analysts work with complex and dynamic situations.
They have to find interesting industry sectors and companies from the market, analyze them,
and return their opinions to the market. Therefore, they work as gatekeepers, that is, they are
both users and producers of information.
Inputs
On one side, the available information in the environment is potentially larger than the
knowledge worker's capacity to absorb it (Evaristo et al., 1995; O'Reilly, 1980; Simpson and
Prusak, 1995). On the other side, there is difficulty of obtaining the relevant information in
the right time (Katzer and Fletcher, 1992; Königer and Janowitz, 1995). To cope with these
limitations, knowledge workers develop an information behavior, that is, a set of activities
through which information becomes useful (Taylor, 1990). Information behavior represents
what, how, when, and where information is acquired, and also how it is interpreted and used.
Knowledge workers have key roles to perform a task. First, they analyze their internal
resources (domain knowledge, expertise) to check their need to obtain external resources
(information of the environment, information processing methods). In fact, they use their own
resources as input, which are the cognitive abilities and intellectual capabilities to perform the
task. Then, they identify the need to obtain additional resources and proceed it.
R&D workers use their internal resources to generate ideas and to choose proper technology
and methods. The lack of good ideas or the need to explore them determine the external
resources access. Corporate lawyers use their internal resources but external sources are
essential. They have to consult documents, laws, and previous legal opinions and then
integrate that content with their own background knowledge. Securities analysts use external
signals to identify opportunities and threats in the market. They consider company reports and
personal contacts valuable sources. Their internal resources are important to integrate general
and specific, objective and subjective, personal and impersonal data from the environment.
10
Cognitive process
During the cognitive process the acquired information is processed and used for the task
execution. The whole sequence can happen at repeated times until that there are the necessary
resources to perform the task and to produce a result. The cognitive process accomplishes
several functions. It integrates both internal and external information, compares required task
with available resources to perform it, and shares information and task management. In other
words, knowledge workers perform some cognitive processing in order to organize internal
and external information. Further they determine how they analyze the information and what
they do which it post analysis. All of these processes are transparent and unobservable and are
information management. However, in order to facilitate the cognitive processing, they
employ external artifacts, in particular technology, to achieve their tasks in an observable
way. These acts therefore represent the end result of internal processing and may be
considered as task management.
In fact, the cognitive process overcomes the knowledge work process. It begins before the
information acquisition and finishes after the result generation. That is, the cognitive process
is a continuum in the individual knowledge worker. However, detailed analysis of this
continuum is not considered in this paper, which is concerned with the work process.
Some examples of the R&D work are scanning the environment, generating ideas, and
evaluating them against the standing criteria and project objectives, building and testing
alternative solutions, and structuring theories and concepts. Corporate lawyers have to
interpret different information meanings in order to reduce equivocality, anticipate judgments,
and establish strategies to expected and unexpected decisions. Securities analysts use external
devices to monitor the environment and to support their cognitive process. They must
integrate and interpret different information to produce a comprehensive picture of the
companies.
Outcomes
Products and knowledge are the outcomes of the model but they are not the end of the
process. The information content of the product and knowledge can return to the knowledge
worker and information resources through a feedback cycle. This information may be stored
in and with the support of information resources in order to be used in new processes.
Knowledge is the result of various stages of the process, such as doing, interpretation,
analysis, and decision. It takes part of the knowledge workers’ resources and can be used in
new situations. The result, as well as the inputs and work process that generated it, are
elements that can be joined to the knowledge worker resources. Thus, the execution of similar
tasks in the future should demand smaller needs to obtain external resources.
R&D workers generate solutions and innovations. Their findings are important to new
projects because they learn by trial and error experiences and product/process results.
Corporate lawyers produce legal opinions and evaluate their performance against objective
results such as final verdicts, company’s profits, and public image. Their production is
incorporated by the law community as jurisprudence and legal practice. Securities analysts try
to express the actual value of a given company, but they must make forecasts. They expect to
write good research reports to support investment decisions. The experience and historical
11
results (developed products, legal opinions, and company evaluations) of the three knowledge
workers can be used as a guide to make new decisions and recommendations.
Discussion
The analysis of the three examples using the key elements indicates some differences and
similarities. Differences show that the environments have peculiarities based on their distinct
work processes. Similarities are encountered in the nature, conceptual aspects and principles
of the knowledge work. Table 1 summarizes the differences and similarities found in this
analysis.
Element
Information environment
Inputs
Cognitive process
Outcomes
Differences
Similarities
• Amount of collective work using
information
• Information spread
• Level of previous internal
knowledge as input
• Use of information resources
• External sources dependence
• Cognitive process itself: evaluating
ideas, interpreting meanings,
integrating information
• Information use orientation
(scanning, focus on problems,
monitoring)
• Knowledge: creation x adaptation/
maintenance
• Level of knowledge incorporated in
new processes
• The information environment is the
organizational setting where the work
process occurs
• Information is the primary resource to
perform knowledge work tasks
• Integration of internal and external
information
• Information interpreting is the most
important cognitive process
• Performance is based on the obtained
results against expectations
• Knowledge acquisition is based on
the inputs and work process
Table 1. Differences and similarities in knowledge work environments
This findings are limited to the three examples investigated. It is believed that studying other
knowledge work environments might reinforce the conclusions presented here. However,
some evidences address to the importance of investigating same professionals in different
companies. As it is stated in section 4, “Each type of organization (industry, structure, size,
management style, etc.) affect differently the way information takes place and is used”.
12
5 CONCLUSION
The main contribution of the knowledge work cognitive process model developed and
analyzed in this study is to consider the cognitive dimension of the work process. That means
the knowledge worker resources are the primary component to perform knowledge work
tasks. Furthermore, the model extends the potential outcomes of the traditional knowledge
work processes adding knowledge to the product. Then, a valuable output of the process is the
knowledge which may be used to further increase the individual and organizational
knowledge base, augmenting the individuals’ productivity and matching the objectives of the
learning organization.
The results obtained also indicates the use of information - the way it is selected, processed,
stored, and interpreted - in different work environments points the results out to knowledge
acquisition (learning) and task outcomes (performance). The notion that the process can
support the maintenance, adaptation, and construction of knowledge and that both existing
and new knowledge can support the improvement of the process is also developed. Finally,
suggestions are presented to offer support to the process for which the information is used. As
a consequence, the contributions of the Information Technology, methods and techniques of
training, and activities performed by the knowledge worker which add value should be
explored.
The knowledge work process is a individual learning process. In order to transform it in an
organizational learning process, in which the ability of adaptation to a variety of tasks and
levels is presumed, some effort must be spent on mapping and analyzing the knowledge work
process. Both work and cognitive process can be more useful to knowledge workers when
they are encouraged to reflect about their activities.
As a learning process, knowledge work needs continuous improvement. It can take place in
the organizational memory through techniques for eliciting, capturing, documenting and
disseminating knowledge workers’ learning. It means a support to the knowledge workers’
cognitive process as well as a form to manage the knowledge in the organization. Some ways
to improve the knowledge work are enabling knowledge to access and reuse, establishing
adequate conditions to teamwork, and providing specific Information Technology resources.
REFERENCES
ALVESSON, M. Organization as rhetoric: knowledge-intensive firms and the struggle with
ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies, 30(6), 1993, pp. 997-1016.
ARGYRIS, C.; SCHON, D. Organizational learning: a theory of action approach.
Reading: Addison Wesley, 1978.
BAKOPOULOS, J. A. Y. Toward a more precise concept of information technology.
Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information Systems, 1985, pp.
17-24.
BLACKLER, F. Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: an overview and
interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6), 1995, pp. 1021-1046.
13
BOFF, L. H.; COX, B. Towards a comprehensive model of the knowledge work process.
Proceedings of the Twentieth ENANPAD (Meeting of the Association of the Graduate
Programs in Management ). Angra dos Reis (Brazil), 23-25 September 1996. p. 43-56.
DAVENPORT, T. H.; JARVENPAA, S. L.; BEERS, M. C. Improving knowledge work
processes. Sloan Management Review, Summer 1996, p. 53-65.
DAVIS, G., COLLINS, R. W., EIERMAN, M., NANCE, W. D. Conceptual Model for
Research on Knowledge Work. Working paper WP-91-10. Management Information
Systems Research Center (MISRC), University of Minnesota, February 1991.
EVARISTO, R.; ADAMS, C.; CURLEY, S. Information load revisited: a theoretical model.
Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems.
Amsterdam, December 1995, p. 197-206.
HUBER, G. P.; DAFT, R. L. The information environments of organizations. In: F. M. Jablin,
K. H. Roberts, L. L. Putnam e L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational
communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. Newbury Park: Sage Publications,
1987, p. 130-164.
KATZER, J.; FLETCHER, P. T. The information environment of managers. In: M. Williams
(Ed.). Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 27. Medford, NJ:
Learned Information, Inc. for The American Society of Information Science. 1992. p.
227-263.
KING, W. R., GROVER, V. e HUFNAGEL, E. H. Using information and information
technology for sustainable competitive advantage: some empirical evidence. Information
& Management, 17, 1989, pp. 87-93.
KÖNIGER, P.; JANOWITZ, K. Drowning in information, but thirsty for knowledge.
International Journal of Information Management, 15(1), 1995. p. 5-16.
McCOMICK, E. J. Human Factors in Engineering and Design. McGraw-Hill, 1976.
MONTAGNA, P. Uncertainty as a scientific concept and its application to the study of
occupations and organizations. In: S. Fiddle (Ed.), Uncertainty: behavioral and social
dimensions. New York: Praeger, 1980, pp. 9-42.
NEWELL, A.; SIMON, H. Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,
1972.
O'REILLY, C. A. Individuals and information overload in organizations: is more necessarily
better? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23, No 4, 1980. p. 684-696.
PAYNE, J. W. Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: an
information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 16(2), 1976, p. 366-387.
PRAHALAD, C. and HAMEL, G. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard
Business Review, 68(3), 1990, pp. 79-91
SCHICK, A. G.; GORDON, L. A.; HAKA, S. Information overload: a temporal approach.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(3), 1990, pp. 199-220.
14
SIMPSON, C. W., PRUSAK, L. Troubles with information overload: moving from quantity
to quality in information provision. International Journal of Information
Management, 15(6), 1995, pp. 413-425.
STEWART, T. A. Welcome to the revolution. Fortune, 128(15), December 13, 1993, pp. 3238.
TAYLOR, R. S. Information use environments. In: B. Dervin and M. J. Voigt (Eds.).
Progress in Communication Sciences, Vol. 10. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
1990. p. 217-255.
THOMAS, B. E.; SCHMIDT, W. E. Building a Knowledge Base for the Knowledge Worker
System, Interim Report FF-92/02/ADA258544. USACERL, August 1992.
ZUBOFF, S. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. New York:
Basic Books, 1988.