Hi Agnieszka,

thank your very much for your response. Unfortunately I'm interested in processes of knowledge creation in research groups and projects, e.g. through processes like externalising tacit knowledge for other people in a research group (Nonaka, Ikujiro; Takeuchi, Hirotaka, 1995).

Best regards & happy new year from Munich, Germany

Max

Mr/dr Fink,

I am curious as to why you think a framework is needed for knowledge creation.

As someone who has a multi-disciplinary background and broad range of interests that span biology, chemistry, computer science, engineering, cognitive psychology, etc., I think knowledge is created by deep thinking about what one sees and encounters in the laboratory and by one's exposure to research literature and interaction with one's colleagues. If one works with another person on the same project, the knowledge each of us generates and /or accumulates will be determined by each of one's experiences, thoughts, successes and failures. It is unlikely that the two person's working on the same project at the same time will have the same "tacit" knowledge as Nonaka might have called it. So, I am not convinced that a "framework" as you call it, on its own will create knowledge of the kind that you may have in mind.But, I am willing to be corrected.

I remember when I was working on an AI project to develop a system that could help engineers to diagnose failures on PCB's. The process of interviewing and registering the the thinking and physical steps each engineer adopted was called "knowledge acquisition". Knowledge acquisition was a vital .step in developing the AI system. Two engineers working together on diagnosing failures on the same PCB came up with different ways of testing and diagnosing and identifying the possible cause of failure on the PCB. They were different but ultimately came to the same conclusion as to which component was faulty and which gate was the real cause of failure. Perhaps sharing of each other's knowledge could benefit from a framework, but real-world problem-solvers will have no patience with frameworks, used by academics for writing papers for publications, and often only read by similar researchers, but conspicuously ignored by real-world practical problem-solvers.

Researchgate is a place, a forum, where lively discourse should take place, and can only be useful if contrasting and opposing viewpoints are aired and discussed. I have provided a contrarian viewpoint.

Good luck with your search for that elusive framework.

I wish you a successful and happy 2019.

Dear Maximilian Fink,

An interesting question. Considering current research problems important for science, I think that the question concerns particularly important issues. I believe that research on this topic should be continued. There was an interesting discussion.

In my opinion, in many areas of knowledge, the modern framework for creating knowledge in science is not yet precisely defined.

I wish you the best in New Year 2019. Best wishes

Somewhat related, but somewhat not: I argue that theory construction itself is a design thinking process, and I think we need to encourage design thinking in the development of new theory.

we are strive to welfare of society . so you just keep your self after society need

Agnieszka Will geb. Gronek

https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process