Collaborative Working Environments: Cross Cultural Inquiry

for All
By Martina Sophia Bach and Leif Bloch Rasmussen‡
CEO. Inquiring Relations and work package-leader of the Öresund Pilot Group in the eSangathan Project,
Folkuniversitetet, Sweden
Associate Professor, Institute of Informatics, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark and work package-leader of the
methodology in the eSangathan Project.

1. Introduction
This paper investigates the possibilities of using the theories and practices on Collaborative
Working Environments (CWE) in order to create cross cultural inquiry for social innovations in a
Globalized World. First we define CWE as based on IT. Then we take the (hi)story and future of
knowing to be a necessary supplement and correction to an understanding and use of theories and
practices on CWE. Then we use findings in a Europe-India project on virtual teams for social
innovations – eSangathan – as a further supplement to CWE of empirical nature. Finally we
combine the two supplements together with CWE to suggest guidelines for cross cultural inquiry
for all through social and informational connectivity.

2. What is CWE?
As an official conception, Collaborative Working Environment (CWE) certainly is not easy to grasp
and embrace since the virtual dimension is not mentioned in the term itself. Starting out with this,
we would like to clarify our understanding of the CWE related to how different collaborative
solutions could support globalised inquiring communities.

Hence, when we are referring to CWE in this article, we put emphasis on the virtual collaborative
workspace where members of a community can communicate, collaborate and actively participate
in an inquiring process. Thus, it is important to separate two kinds of features within a CWE:

1. Synchronous features, meaning that the users must be present at the same time when
exchanging data (for example phone calls).

2. Asynchronous features, meaning that the users do not need to be present at the same time of
the action when they are exchanging data (for example e-mail).

According to Membrado (2007) CWE is composed of a set of features starting with the electronic
messaging system and moving on to the video-conference, through the workflow or the document
management systems. Furthermore, collaborative work solutions can be classified depending on
their finality. Membrado (2007) distinguishes different types of solutions such as: groupware,
collaborative workspaces, communication, document management, knowledge management and
content management, coordination and peer-to-peer solutions. All these different orientations
towards collaborative solutions are supporting various kinds of actions. The communication
solution is for example dealing with e-mail system, mailing lists and video-conferences and the
content management solution features wikis and blogs. A coordination oriented solution is

Corfu 1
supporting shared calendar and tasks, while the knowledge oriented solutions provide the users with
features like search engines and document repositories and expertise cartography.
Taking into account the Web 2.0 paradigm where participation is a key word, the development on
CWE solutions are moving from focusing on collaborating features towards participative ones. A
participative working environment includes features like wikis and blogs.

Based on these understandings of CWE which might be called an attempt to obtain ‘informational
connectivity’ we will explore the social/cultural context in which CWE may function. This journey
will start in a critical perspective on the world of IT and Knowledge Management

3. From IT and Information to Social and Cultural Knowing

We start our journey by following Malhotra (19981) in his evaluation of the promises made by
theories on Knowledge Management, which we also take as being applicable to CWE. He expresses
the problems in this way:

”We are observing increasing hype about the wonders delivered by newest information technologies
in an era characterized by knowledge as the critical resource for business activity. With the advent
of new technologies, such as data mining, intranets, video conferencing, and web casting, several
technology vendors are offering such solutions as panaceas for the business challenges of the
knowledge era. Trade press coverage of the "productivity paradox" has further added to the speed of
the information technology (IT) treadmill by suggesting that increasing investments in new
information technologies should somehow result in improved business performance. … a key factor
for the higher return on the IT dollar is the effective utilization of information as it relates to
organizational performance. How industry executives should go about deciphering the mantra of
"effective utilization," however, remains an illusive issue.”

Practitioners and theoreticians need to develop a greater appreciation for their intangible human
assets, that may be captive in the minds and experiences of their knowledge workers. Churchman
(1971) tells us to be aware of the fact, that:

"To conceive of knowledge as a collection of information seems to rob the concept of all of its
life... Knowledge resides in the user and not in the collection. It is how the user reacts to a
collection of information that matters."

Churchman (1971, 1979) also explicates the importance of humans in the process of knowledge
creation, which is of the most pertinent importance as we experience more and more, that we live in
a world of 'wicked' problems, which are characterized by hypercomplex and discontinuous change.

In other words we need to investigate the possibility of social and cultural knowing of human
beings – in short inquiry - in both Knowledge Management and CWE. Most formulations of
information technology (IT) enabled knowledge Management and CWE seem to have ignored this
point.

So there is a need to leave technology and informational connectivity in the first place as the only
determining factor in a knowledge based society. CWE is but a mean to better ends.

1
Even though the article are written 10 years ago it’s main conclusion is still valid – maybe even more so taoday.

Corfu 2
4. Inquiring Communities as essence of Cross Cultural Inquiry
In The Design of Inquiring Systems (1971) and in The Systems Approach and Its Enemies (1979)
however C. West Churchman identified five traditions of inquiry (social and cultural knowing)
basic to Western philosophy ascribed to Leibniz, Locke, Kant, Hegel and Singer as ”role models”
for ways of creating knowledge2.

But for short we take the five inquiring systems of Churchman to be five Inquiring Communities.
They may be described as in Table 1 using the wordings of Kienholz (1999). In this table we have
added strategies on Knowledge Management based on Binney (2001) and Knox&Kingston (2003).
Finally we have added the CWE technologies that we in mind in the preparation of the eSangathan
project.

2
Other cultural logics as well as other western philosophies may be included. In a paper from 2001 Kristo Ivanov
suggests the expansion of these historical figures to Habermas, Foucault and Derrida. In our own educational settings
we have suggested an expansion to Kierkegaard and Hanna Arendt. And as most of these historical figures are male, a
female approach might recreate the whole matter. But we leave this issue for another occasion, as we are convinced that
this expansion will only stress our points.

Corfu 3
æ
Communities Realistic (Locke) Analytic Idealistic Dialectical Pragmatic
of Inquiry (Leibniz) (Kant) (Hegel) (Singer)
Ways of Consensus: Fact Nets: Multiple Models: welcomes a Contradictions: Progress:
concluding relies on "facts" and expert seeks the "one best way," broad range of views, seeks sees likenesses in things proceeds on the basis of
opinion, seeks solutions operates with models and ideal solutions, is interested in that appear unalike, seeks an eclectic view, uses a
on the that meet formulas, is interested in values, is receptive, and places conflict and synthesis, is tactical, holistic
inquiry current needs, is serious "scientific solutions," is equal value on data and theory interested in change, gets approach; and, being
(Kienholz, about getting concrete prescriptive, and prefers data at underlying innovative and
1999)) results, acts with efficiency to theory and assumptions, sees the adaptive, is best in
and method essence of problems, is complex situations
incisive correction, prefers speculative - asks what if
data over theory. and why not, and regards
data to be meaningless
without interpretation.
Knowledge Analytical - Knowledge is Asset management -Explicit Developmental - Building up ? ?
Management derived from external data management of knowledge the capabilities of the
sources, typically focussing assets (often created as a by- organisation's knowledge
Strategies on customer-related product of the business) which workers through training and
(Binney, Transactional - can be reused in different staff development
2001, Knox Knowledge is embedded in ways. Innovation/Creation -
& Kingston, technology information Process - The codification and Fostering an environment
2003) improvement of business which promotes the creation
practice and the sharing of of new knowledge, for
these improved processes example through R & D and
within the organisation through forming teams of
people from different
disciplines.
-
CWE in the Basecamp Microsoft Sharepoint Web 2.0 ? ?
eSangathan Mayetic Village Wiki-technology
Netcipia
environment
(Membrado
(2007)

Table 1. Inquiring Communities, Knowledge Management Strategies and CWE technologies in eSangathan

Corfu 4
This combination suggests that the IT, Knowledge Management strategies and CWE leaves very
important areas in inquiry open for further explorations. Remember also inquiring communities
based on Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Arendt, Kierkegaard – not to mention other cultural logics
than the Western Cultural logic.

5. eSangathan – a cross cultural exploration

Theoretical tools for social innovation in inquiring communities
What attracted us in the first place were the open spaces in Table 1. There seemed to be possibilities
and we knew from theories and practices in other settings, especially among shop stewards in
Denmark, that it would be possible to create social innovations in strategic planning in companies
based on Churchman’s thinking. A way of thinking that could cut across cultural differences simply
due to the fact that none had used these methodologies before – and most important: that these tools
due to their diversity might be universal.

So we created a stepwise approach based on the following eight tools based on theories of Jantsch
(1975, 1979), Churchman (1971, 1979), Castells (1995-98, 2001), Boisot (1995, 1998, 2007),
Snowden (2002), Snowden & Kurz (2003), Herlau & Tetzschner (2003), Gordjin & Akermann
(2001), Arendt (1971), Capra (1997), Beer (1995), Prahalad (2005), Hart (2007), Mintzberg et.al.
(1998), Lambert (2008), Boje (2001):

Sense making
1. Design for Evolution based on Inquiring Systems and Self-Organizing Heterarchies as a way
of creating open wills
2. Philosophical Practice based on Socratic Dialogue as a way of creating open minds

Relation making
3. Narratives and Storytelling as a way of creating transparency and open hearts
4. Networking as a way of coping with complexity without reductionism

Value making
5. Information Space and Social Learning Cycles as economizing on data and information
6. Leadership in Strategy and Innovation as economizing on labour and capital

Decision making
7. Business Modelling and Financing based ‘production of common good’ through
economized data, labour and capital
8. Action as Vita Activa and Vita Contemplativa

The tools are grouped according to the four ‘making’ roles according in the network theories of
Castells (1995-98, 2001), Snowden (2002) and Snowden & Kurz (2003). All of these tools would
be supported by CWE like mayeticViallage, Microsoft SharePoint, Basecamp, KUBUSNet,
Netcipia, Google Apps, Wikis etc. Strangely enough the eSangathan Project points to the fact, that
these eight tools cannot show their full potential unless they are enabled by IT/CWE.

Corfu 5
In this way the movement in cross cultural communication would be from handling of structures
problems in hierarchical contexts to handling wicked problems in heterarchical contexts. At the
same time the eight tools tries to obtain social and cultural connectivity while the CWE tries to
obtain informational connectivity, see fig. 1.

Heterarchical
Context

Hierarchical
Context

Structured Problem Wicked Problem

Fig.1. Based on Spivack, Nova (2007) and Deliverable D028 in theSangathan Project (2008)

Together the two dimensions from a roadmap for moving towards better social and informational
connectivity in the inquiring communities.

Empirical findings on an inquiring community - eSangathan

But, what is needed – as always in life – is “Communities of Practice”, that are willing to risk their
lives in an experiment with informational and social connectivity. Two such communities were
created in 2007 – one in India and one in the Öresund Region in Sweden/Denmark

The eSangathan project started in October 1, 2006 for duration of two years, and is an EU-funded
support action in the frame of the IST FP6 program. The work is concentrated on a very specific
segment of the population: the ageing knowledge workers. The European demographics tell us that
most of the people will have to work longer in order that the competitive capabilities and social
cohesion in Europe can be sustained. This is already a common practice in India, where a large
proportion of the retired knowledge workers continue to work for their former employers as experts.
On the other hand, Europe faces globally a very low level of employment of the 50+ knowledge
workers and has to improve this situation rapidly according to the Lisbon Strategy. eSangathan is

Corfu 6
testing this approach in the Öresund region in Sweden/Denmark through a heterogeneous group of
ageing Swedes and Danes; both retired and working people. Folkuniversitetet in Sweden, one of the
partners of the project, in co-operation with the Copenhagen Business School (CBS) in Denmark
runs this group of people. They explore themes of mutual interest using CWE and the tools for
social innovation. This group is labeled the Öresund Pilot Group. In the Oresund pilot Basecamp
and Wiki technology is used as the main CWE technology.

A second and parallel pilot – the Indian Pilot - is run in India in one of a major Indian corporation in
order to test how the implementation of a CWE could facilitate and turn more efficient the work and
the life of the expert retirees. Mahindra & Mahindra Corporation, as a member of the consortium,
hosts and manages this pilot with the technical support of Tech Mahindra. In the Indian Pilot the
Microsoft SharePoint and Wiki technologies are used as the main CWE technology.

The methodological approaches used to define, segment and implement the pilots come from
Copenhagen Business School and the whole project is conceived as a virtual community of inquiry
thanks to the experience and support from Netcipia. The scientific experience of this specific
segment of population lies with AgeProof; the Dutch partner of the consortium and Distance Expert
from France is responsible for co-coordinating the team.

The Öresund Pilot

To establish a pilot group in Öresund with the aim of creating social innovation through the use of a
CWE for aged workers is a cross cultural mission, even though these two cultures seem very much
alike. We had to find motivated Danes and Swedes who were willing to learn non-traditional
methods and tools, and also people who were willing to contribute to a change of the labour market
landscape for aged workers.

In mid March 2007, we had 35 presumptive aged workers who had shown interest in joining the
Öresund Pilot Group through submitted applications describing background and motivation.
Approximately a year after the kick-off meeting with the pilot, the group consisted of only 20 pilot
members. Some left because they got work, and some did just not find the time to be 100%
engaged. Others basically find our methodology to abstract or too philosophical to cope with.

The Öresund Pilot Group met for the first time in March 2007, where a heterogeneous group of
Danes and Swedes with an average age above 60, men and woman, MBA´s, engineers, teacher’s
etc. joined forces in order to test Collaborative Working Environments and tools for social
innovations. The idea was to arrange only a minor amount of physical meetings and that rest of the
work should be carried out on the CWE. We started out with a kick-off meeting introducing the
project and specifically the roadmap for the Öresund Pilot. All pilot members also got an
introduction to the CWE Basecamp – a fairly simple solution for collaborative work on the Internet.
The following meetings were about Team Syntegrity - our tool for self-organizing collaborative
development and implementation. These sessions where followed by an introduction and some
practical exercises in applying the Socratic Dialogue with the aim of an inquiring dialogue instead
of convincing discussion. We soon came to realize that a “few physical meetings” was not enough.

Out Team Syntegrity meetings ended up with sessions on syntegrations where twelve themes were
merged into seven and our final themes covered topics like sustainable energy, ages across borders,
social economics, joint EU-India project from the Bottom Of the Pyramid (BOP) and ecological

Corfu 7
resources. With our themes formulated, we started to implement Max Boisot´s theory on
Information Space and Social Learning Cycle (SLC). Each theme should try to use the SLC in order
to find out in which areas they had knowledge and expertise and in which areas they did not have
insight. Parallel with this process, we tried to get them to find a way to structure the SLC-questions
and the answers within the CWE. A couple of support meetings in the Basecamp environment was
arranged since some of the pilot members required training, but except for these sessions, our pilot
members has learned the virtual environment themselves, through “learning by doing”.

If we make an attempt to analyse the CWE usage a year after the kick-off meeting, it has been quite
obvious that some members would not admit that they felt insecure using Basecamp, so in the start
only a few messages were posted, followed up by a comment or two. This has probably to do with
the fact that they did not know what to do on the CWE. Hence, grasping the idea with the tools for
social innovation, the activity increased rapidly and we could see a more sophisticated use of the
CWE. Instead of just posting simple messages, the pilot members started to test other features, like
uploading files and using to-do-lists. So far, the conclusion is that you really need a stimulating
reason in order to start using and explore the CWE.

From a general point of view studying the overall roadmap, we can detect a mind-shift where pilot
members are slowly moving from traditional hierarchical thinking dealing with structured problems
towards self-organizing heterarchies dealing with complexity and un-structured ‘wicked’ problems.
Still, pilot members are struggling with dilemmas like unification vs. fragmentation, authority vs.
uncertainty, individual vs. collective action, direction vs. self-motivation etc.

6. Leadership and Inquiring Communities: A Challenge from

Scandinavia

Lessons for social connectivity

Is it possible to manage learning and inquiry, to manage inquiring communities as expressed in

table 1 above? In two books the Danish philosopher Ole Fogh Kirkeby (1993, 1998) has shown the
fundamental difference between management and leadership. He shows that management is based
on a subject-object relationship, where the manager is directing and ordering his/her subordinates
by way of being superior and the interests of that superior. The opposite of that approach is
leadership, where subjects are in dialogue with subjects on mutual understanding of mutual
interests. To explain management one may think of a circus, where the animals are directed and
trained according to the needs of the manager and the audience. The metaphor of leadership is
people searching together for our common future.

In order to facilitate and encourage social innovations social connectivity and informational
connectivity must be based on leadership in self-organizing heterarchies as the ideal for ‘solving’
wicked problems of any kind across cultures. What is needed for that is Cross Cultural Net-
Workers”3 that make use of the following guidelines in creating social connectivity:
• critical “border crossing” pedagogy

3
This term is an elaboration on Henry A. Giroux’s term “cultural worker” (1997).

Corfu 8
 Border crossing pedagogy is attentive to developing a democratic public philosophy that
respects the notion of difference as part of a common struggle to extend the quality of public
life.

• practical use of philosophy

The idea is to use the different paradigms in philosophy to identify the basic human conditions
behind any strategic school or any strategic thinking.

• practical use of ethics

Ethics and empathy in communities is an expression and impression of sensibility towards all
parties involved in the strategic decision-making process.

• bottom-up design
This way of thinking is in fact based on de-learning among net-workers as they are forced to
accept a way of learning (individually and collectively) which are based on the premises set up
by someone else than himself or herself. In the words of Ove Korsgaard (1997), this way of
enlightenment is coming “from above” and “from outside”. He claims the opposite as being the
fundamental nature and praxis in Denmark through the creation of unions and the co-operative
movement: enlightenment must was created “from inside” and “from below”.
• NetWorking and NetMaking
Networks are the fundamental stuff of which new communities are and will be made.

• language re-design and re-presentation

All the above mentioned elements are new and experimental in the design of a life in
communities. The languages used are most often than not related to the specific discipline even
when that discipline is called cross disciplinary or trans-disciplinary. These specific languages
must be used of course in their own right and in their own domain. However getting them
together in a social and cultural setting requires at least the work and inspiration on two tasks:
(1) the development of a word book across disciplines and domains with practical examples,
and (2) the potential development of a fundamentally new language for design of working life,
strategies and organizations

• arts, aesthetics, faith and friendship

Creativity is very much needed in the design process. But even more important is the need for
courage, experiment, and re-creation. Courage in order to sustain the strategic fight involved in
radical change and experiment in order to try and evaluate new ways of thinking and acting
strategically. And finally, re-creation is needed in order to rest and introspect. These elements
in strategic thinking and acting can be supported by arts and aesthetics, as these human ways of
living may bring power and comfort to lonely souls forced into a black forest of not knowing
what to do.

No single individual, organization or community to our knowledge has yet been able to develop and
use to support or enable all these types of Inquiring Communities at the same time and in the same
space. It calls for cross-cultural and life-long learning. And, finally faith and friendship in a
common effort must be a quality of a community across cultures.

Corfu 9
CWE for Informational Connectivity
We are – and we were especially at the outset of eSangathan - in search for a way of using CWE to
support Inquiring Communities, that can foster social innovations through knowledge creation and
knowledge sharing. In the eSangathan we had a special focus on – and a great confidence in – that
experienced seniors could and would use the new possibilities offered by CWE. We can confirm all
the advices put forward by Contour Consulting (2005):

• Getting it right – Characteristics of effective Virtual Teams

Effective virtual teams cannot be guaranteed by precisely blending a number of ingredients to a
specific recipe. However, a number of characteristics that are common to the most effective
virtual teams have been uncovered. These are outlined below.
• Technical expertise. The team members possess sufficient experience, competence,
knowledge and connection to information and resources to successfully address the task they
are faced with.
• “Telepresence”. The team is able to access and use technologies that enable a vividness of
communication (there is 'media richness') and allows for interactivity (team members are able
to influence form or content during telecommunications). Telepresence is in effect a cyber form
of “being there”.
• Initial face-to-face contact. Time is spent on developing relationships and agreeing how to
work, with this face-to-face contact being facilitated.
• Surfacing assumptions. During the early stages of team formation there is an explicit effort to
surface assumptions about how the team will work. The team develops agreed ways of working
on problem definition, information gathering, problem analysis and decision making.
• Training. There is explicit training in communication practices and what constitutes timely and
acceptable responses.
• Vision. A commonly held sense of purpose and a shared vision is created and maintained.
• Clarity. The task is clearly understood and explicitly agreed by all team members.
• Balanced goals. Goal setting for task, process and behaviours creates clarity without
restricting options and actions, helping to create team cohesion, generate ideas, engender
trust, commitment and collaboration leading to high quality decision-making.
• Role flexibility and empowerment. As the work of the team evolves leadership on issues such
as process, subject matter, team development or technology choices moves effortlessly around
between team members.
• Trust. Effort is deliberately put into building trust between team members with that trust based
on a shared understanding of common values, needs, goals and preferences. Each member
becomes trusted to act as an agent for other members and for the team.
• Continuous performance monitoring. Once agreements are made and become part of the
working process they are continuously monitored and reviewed by the team as part of a
continuous learning process.
• Frequent communication. Team members regularly keep in touch on both an informal, social
level as well as a task, process and behaviour level and the communication is cooperative and
open.
• Conflict is accepted; disagreement focused on the task, team processes or team behaviours is
welcomed and dealt with constructively and openly in the team. Disagreement focused on
relationships and personality issues is not allowed to fester. The team surfs on the waves of
constructive conflict without drowning in a maelstrom of emotions.

Corfu 10
What really makes a difference, however, can be stated as it is done by Contour Consulting (2005):

“All of the characteristics outlined above are important to creating successful virtual teams but one
point stands out across research; the most successful virtual teams spend time during their
formation period, frequently face-to-face, getting to know each other formally (competencies,
experience, connections etc.) and informally (socially and personally), reaching agreements about
how to work, this process being guided by a facilitator.”

7. Starting Point of Inquiry: A story on Passion and

Intelligence
This journey will be a never ending story. Son in stead of a conclusion we will pause with a story
during the process of creating the eSangathan process. The term eSangathan is based on Hindu: San
meaning ‘unbreakable’ and Gathan meaning ‘being strong together’. So the project was about
creating connectivity across cultures. Through personal correspondence with an Indian philosopher
– Akhil Vyom – the question was raised from our side on the differences in Western and Indian
cultural logics - maybe as a search for old Hindu wisdom. He responded by telling, that in order to
understand Hindi one had to have the words as a picture that might create ‘associative resonance’.
A work can never stand alone with simple letters, it has to create a kind of heroic mood in the
listener, reader.

Furthermore he pointed to a formula coined by the American architect and philosopher Buckminster
Fuller, who said that Connection + Method = Wealth. In Hindi this would be Bhakti + Yûkti =
Samriddhi. During a conference in Mumbai on the eSangathan project in April 2008 a person from
the audience explained this meaning further:

He said that Bhakti deep down would mean Passion. That Yûkti would mean Intelligence and that
Samriddhi would mean personal, social and cultural wealth in living.

We take this to mean that informational connectivity needs intelligence, social connectivity needs
passion and together they may form cultural connectivity through vibrating associative resonances.

References
Arendt, Hannah: The Life of the Mind, Hartcourt, 1971
Bach, M. S.: Transfer of Innovation in Networks - A Narrative Systems Approach on Inquiring
Communication, Inquiring Relations, 2006
Beer, Stafford: Beyond Dispute, Wiley, 1995
Binney D.: The knowledge management spectrum - understanding the KM landscape, Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 5, no. 1, 2001
Boisot, Max: Information Space, Oxford University Press, 1995
Bopisot, Max: Knowledge Assets, Butterworth, 1998
Boisot, Max: Explorations in Information Space, Oxford University Press, 2007

Corfu 11
Boje, David: Using Narrative and Telling Stories, in David Holman and Richard Thorpe (eds.): The
Manager as a Practical Author, Sage, 2001
Capra, Fritjof: The Web of Life, Harper Collins, 1997
Castells, Manuel: The Rise of the Network Society, Vol. I-III, Butterworth, 1995-98
Castells, Manuel: The Internet Galaxy, Oxford University Press, 2001
Churchman, C.West: The Design of Inquring Systems, Basic Books, 1971
Churchman, C.West: The Systems Approach and Its Enemies, Basic Books, 1979
Contour Consulting: Designing and Building Virtual Teams, April, 2005
eSangathan: www.esangathan.eu
Fogh Kierkeby, Ole: Event and Body-Mind, Doctoral Thesis, 1993, (in Danish)
Fogh Kirkeby, Ole: Philosophy of Leadership, Samfundslitteratur, 1998 (in Danish).
Giroux, Henry: Border Crossings, Routledge, 1993
Hart, S.L.: Capitalism at the Crossroads, Wharton School Publ., 2007
Herlau, H. & Tetzschner, H.: From JobTaker to JobMaker, Samfundslitteratur, 2006 (in Danish)
Gordjin, Jaap & Akermann, Hans (2001): Designing and Evaluating e-Business Models, IEEE,
Intelligen e-business, July/August, 2001
Ivanov, Kristo: The Systems Approach to Design, and Inquiring Information Systems: Scandinavian
Experiences and Proposed Research Program. Information Systems Frontiers 3(1), 2001
Jantsch, Eric: Design for Evolution, Braziller, 1975
Jantsch, Eric: Self-Organizing Universe, Addison-Wesley, 1979
Kienholz, Alice: Systems Rethinking: An Inquiring Systems Approach to the Art and Practice
of the Learning Organization, Alice Kienholz Associates, Febr. 1999
Kierkegaard, Søren: Collected Works, 3. Edition, Gyldendal, 1962 (in Danish)
Knox, Haggie & Kingston John: Choosing Your Knowledge Management Strategy, Journal of
Knowledge Management Practice, June 2003
Korsgaard, Over: Kampen om Lyset, Gyldendal, 1997 (in Danish)
Lambert, Joe: Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community, Center for Digital
Storytelling, 2nd Edition, no date (see also: http://www.storycenter.org/book.html)
Lundin, M. S & Rasmussen, L. B.: Paradoxes in IT, Education and Citizenship, Paper presented at
2nd European Conference on Information Technologies in Education and Citizenship. Barcelona,
2002.
Lundin, Martina Sophia & Rasmussen, Leif Bloch: A Radical Scandinavian (Øresundsk”)
Approach to Inquiring Organizations, IFIP World Congress, Montreal, 2001, published in Berleur,
J. & Brunnstein (eds): “Issues of Choice and Quality of Life in the Information Society, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 2002
Lundin, M. S.: Human Interaction in Knowledge Management – a critical communication
perspective on Communities of Practice, Master Thesis, Inst. for Media- and Communication,
University of Lund, 2002
Lundin, M. S., and Vendelø, M. T.: Using inquiring Practice and Producing Exformation for
Information Systems Development - Towards improved understanding between developers and
users of information systems. In: J. F. Courtney, J. D. Haynes and D. Paradice (eds.) Inquiring
Organizations: Moving from Knowledge Management to Wisdom. Hershey, PA: Idea Group
Publishing, 2005
Membrado, Miguel: State of the Art in CWE, eSangathan-project, 2007
Mintzberg, H.: Strategy Safari, Prentice.Hall, 1998
Malhotra, Yogesh: Knowledge Management in Inquring Organizations, Proceedings of 3rd
Americas Conference on Information Systems (Philosophy of Information Systems Mine
Track), Indianapolis, IN, August 15-17, 1997

Corfu 12
Malhotra, Yogesh: Knowledge Management for the New World of Business,
TOOLS@WORK: Deciphering the Knowledge Management Hype’ in the Joutrnal for
Quality & Participation special issue on Learning and Information Management, Vol. 21, no.
4, July/August 1998
Prahalad, C.K.: The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, Wharton School Publ., 2005
Retvig, Jane & Rasmussen, Leif Bloch: Signs of Exformation Systems, in Leif Bloch Rasmussen,
Colin Beardon & Silvio Munari (eds.): Computers and Networks in the Age of Globalization,
Kluwer Academic Publ.. 2001
Rueda Ortiz, R., Herlau, H. & Rasmussen, L.B.: Philosophical Inquiry into Social Informatics, in
Jacques Berleur et.al (eds.): Social Informatics: An Information Society for All, Springer, 2006
Snowden, D.: Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 6, no. 2, 2002, also: www.cognitive-
edge.com/articlesbydavesnowden.php
Snowden, D. & Kurtz, C.F.: The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-Making in a complex and
complicated world, www.cognitive-edge.com/articlesbydavesnowden.php, 23 sider
Spivack, Nova, „Web 3.0 – Next Step for Web?“, Nova Spivack’s Weblog,
http://novaspivack.typepad.com, July 3, 2007
Singer, E.A.: In Search of a Way of Life, Columbia University Press, 1948
Strawser, Michael: Both/And Reading Kierkegaard from Irony to Edification, Fordham, 1998:
s

Corfu 13