Extending organizational cognition: A conceptual exploration of mental extension in organizations (original) (raw)
Related papers
A Discussion on Representing Organizations and Teams as Cognitive Systems
AYBU Business Journal - DergiPark, 2022
Viewing organizations/work-groups/teams as cognitive systems that process information is either a prevalent perspective or a tacit assumption in many management studies with a long history (Hayek, 1949; Simon, 1945). In this research, first, ontology of cognitive system (or cognition) will be discussed in the context of organizations and organizational behavior. It will be exhibited in the light of the literature that different approaches on this subject affect research methods, findings and interpretations of these findings in management sciences, especially in the organizational behavior literature. The two main distinctions in this regard are as follows. 1-Cognition as information processing and symbol manipulation and organization is the information processor. In other words, the mental representation of the world is based on symbols (representationalist perspective). 2-The antirepresentationalist: the external world is not a collection of given facts independent from the individual minds of agents or collective mind of groups, but merely a construction by our given or emerging knowledge structures, the environment and the action are situational/contingent. Accordingly, there is a conflict between the notion of tacit knowledge and the representationalist symbol-processing cognitivist view (Tsoukas, 2005). Another distinction emerges when we analyze the activities of teams/work-groups as information processing and knowledge production activities, below the organizational level of analysis, at the group level. As a consequence of the assumption, considering team cognition as information content, a product/output, and investigating as such, is a specific ontological attitude. However, grounding the team cognition as an emergent phenomenon, of collection of processes and actions during collaboration is an alternative approach and research paradigm, which considers the cognition as the process of collaborative interaction (Cooke et.al 2012). At the organizational level of analysis, this second approach is consistent with focusing on "organizational knowing" rather than organizational knowledge (Cook & Brown, 1999; Orlikowski, 2002).
Organizational cognition: A critical perspective on the theories in use
In: Cowley S., Vallée-Tourangeau F. (eds) Cognition Beyond the Brain. Springer, 2017
This chapter is concerned with exploring the ontology of organisational cognition (OC) through conceptual mapping in order to recognise and understand what OC really is about. The objective is not to provide a comprehensive literature review of this area, but that of mapping the concept of OC so that the meaning of the terms can be defined and its field better determined. In so doing, the article considers several perspectives under which the domain of " organisation " interacts with or relate to " cognition " (or it does not do so). A table that summarises similarities and differences among approaches is then presented. This table is then used as a tool to demonstrate possible overlaps, gaps, and define possible directions for future research in the field.
New Horizons in Managerial and Organizational Cognition
New Horizons in Managerial and Organizational Cognition
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters' suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.
Cognition in organizational analysis: who's minding the store? Organization Studies
1993
This paper provides a framework for organizing research and theory on cognition as discussed in the managerial/organizational literature. Cognition is herein considered to be a property of systems and thereby independent of a specific level of analysis. Research on cognition can be classified on the basis of whether the main concern is with the structure or process of cognition and whether it attends to differences in cognitive style. Cognition is discussed across the individual, group and organizational levels of analysis. The theoretical and methodological issues which emerge are then explored. Future research directions are suggested. 1The increasing interest in the cognitive approach to organization analysis is based on the assumption that organizational behaviors are manifestations of cognitive phenomena. But beyond this assumption, researchers differ widely in their preferred level of analysis and methodological approach. Many insist that "organizations don't think o...
Theiner, G., Allen, C., & Goldstone, R. (2010). Recognizing Group Cognition. Cognitive Systems Research, 11(4), 378-395.
In this paper, we approach the idea of group cognition from the perspective of the ‘‘extended mind’’ thesis, as a special case of the more general claim that systems larger than the individual human, but containing that human, are capable of cognition (Clark , 2008; Clark & Chalmers, 1998). Instead of deliberating about ‘‘the mark of the cognitive’’ (Adams & Aizawa, 2008), our discussion of group cognition is tied to particular cognitive capacities. We review recent studies of group problem solving and group memory which reveal that specific cognitive capacities that are commonly ascribed to individuals are also aptly ascribed at the level of groups. These case studies show how dense interactions among people within a group lead to both similarity-inducing and differentiating dynamics that affect the group’s ability to solve problems. This supports our claim that groups have organization-dependent cognitive capacities that go beyond the simple aggregation of the cognitive capacities of individuals. Group cognition is thus an emergent phenomenon in the sense of Wimsatt (1986). We further argue that anybody who rejects our strategy for showing that cognitive properties can be instantiated at multiple levels in the organizational hierarchy on a priori grounds is a "demergentist," and thus incurs the burden of proof for explaining why cognitive properties are ‘‘stuck’’ at a certain level of organizational structure. Finally, we show that our analysis of group cognition escapes the ‘‘coupling-constitution’’ charge that has been leveled against the extended mind thesis (Adams & Aizawa, 2008).
Team Mental Model: Construct or Metaphor?
Journal of Management, 1994
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in group cognition in the field of organizational science. However, despite the apparent enthusiasm for the notion of the group mind in some modern guise, important conceptual work is needed to examine the concept critically. We attempt to do this in our treatment of the content, form, function, antecedents, and consequences of team mental models. In addition, we illustrate how the construct can bring explanatory power to theories of team performance and offer other implicationsfor research and practice.
Cognition in Organisations: What it Is and how it Works
European Management Review, 2020
Drawing on contemporary work that traces cognition to embodiment, we present a model of cognition in organisations. In so doing, we add a middle ground to previous models: far from opposing macro to micro, we focus on how the meso influences complex adaptive dynamics. Taking peer-review as an exemplar, we show that organisational needs can be fulfilled by orchestrated coordination. Constrained by brains and bodies (the micro domain) that attune to structural constraints (the macro domain), human beings use material cultureartefacts, language, practices, etc.to animate what we call social organising in the meso domain. The resulting coordination can anticipate organisational goals such that, as demonstrated in the case of peer-review, social organising regulates epistemic practice. Flexible, embodied activity enables reviewers and to meet the aims of organised science by pooling the expertise of those involved. They use multi-scalar dynamics that are mediated by material, temporal and spatial resources that, when concerted, constrain and enable organisational cognition.
Organizations as cognitive systems: what do they process and deliver?
2007
The substitution of knowledge to information as the entity that organizations process and deliver raises a number of questions concerning the nature of knowledge. The dispute on the codifiability of tacit knowledge and that juxtaposing the epistemology of practice vs. the epistemology of possession can be better faced by revisiting two crucial debates. One concerns the nature of cognition and
A Theory of Organizational Cognition: Principles and Concepts
2008
Organizations and the environment change over time. Not only change their structures and processes of functioning, but also the perspectives that researchers have about them over periods of time. Hence, scientists need to review theories of organizations in order to formulate new solutions to the problems of the present. It is in such a direction of thinking that this paper contributes by introducing new concepts, principles and propositions towards a theory of organizational cognition. It put forwards new perspectives about the organization and the environment, and also about the relations between them through the concept of cognition. From these backgrounds, this research also contributes by presenting the concepts of organizational intelligence and autonomy, hierarchic levels of cognition in organizational systems, along with cognitive definitions and complex models for the organization and the environment.