The evaluation of knowledge claims in an innovation project: A case study
基于Toulmin论证理论构建框架，通过一家大型建筑技术跨国公司的案例研究，分析组织如何评估知识主张的有效性，并反思Nonaka和Takeuchi的正当化理论，揭示创新成败的知识评估视角。
Understanding how an organization determines what knowledge is valid leads to new insights about how firms cope with innovation. Although the evaluation of knowledge is a relevant topic in the field of knowledge management, the existing literature does not provide substantial contributions. Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) theory of justification is the only established approach. This study adopts an empirical approach for improving the understanding of knowledge claim evaluation by presenting a conceptual framework based on Toulmin’s (1958) argumentation theory. We apply the framework in a small-scale study at the headquarters of a large building technology multinational. Based on the results, we reflect upon Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) justification theory. Our findings indicate that the justification theory explains actual knowledge claim evaluation only partially. The unexplained parts, for which we explore alternative meanings, enlighten why innovations fail or succeed from the viewpoint of knowledge claim evaluation.