Knowledge creation and solution generation methods in the design and management of rural development

• Autorzy: Krakowiak-Bal A. , Wdowiak W. , Ziemiańczyk U.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14597/INFRAECO.2018.2.2.036

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The goal of the monograph was to: • show sample spheres of functioning and cooperation of institutions acting for rural development and principles of developing processes and procedures for organizing or modernizing information and knowledge as well as define adequate inventive methods for generating ideas, • elaborate on principles and rules of the methodology for generating ideas in the construction of options for solving problems, formulating criteria and conducting the evaluation of solution variants, selecting the optimal variant and implementing the chosen variant as the final result of the study, • distinguish the sample thematic areas of knowledge management in rural areas and define adequate methods of creativity and innovation, with pointing out the stages of appropriate methodologies and methods applied. The presentation of the typology and characteristics of inventive methods for generating solutions and creating knowledge, in the context of methodologies to improve organization of rural areas, which strengthen their competitiveness and innovation based on the principles of sustainable development, was assumed as the main research problem requiring a solution. Problems and methods for generating solutions were defined in conjunction with the study entitled “Organizational standards and rural development in the context of information and knowledge management” (Krakowiak-Bal, Wdowiak, Ziemiańczyk 2017 – subsection 3.3), and the issue of knowledge creation and corresponding methods with the study entitled “Knowledge management in rural development” (Krakowiak-Bal, Łukasik, Mikuła, Pietruszka-Ortyl, Ziemiańczyk 2017). These connections in the case of the aforementioned studies consisted in: • emphasizing the possibilities of applying heuristic methods in generating ideas of solutions presented in Chapter 2 and 3 of this monograph together with the methodologies and Anglo-Saxon methods of improving the organization, including rural areas, presented in the aforementioned Subchapter 3.3, and • emphasizing also the possibilities of applying the heuristic Japanese methods of continuous improvement in knowledge creation, presented in Chapter 4 of this monograph in conjunction with the Japanese methods of continuous improvement of the organization, presented in the aforementioned Subchapter 3.3, in the context of the second study cited above. Solutions generation is a fundamental element of the process of improving the organization, including the organization of rural areas, presented in the monograph. This activity is carried out through the following groups of activities: preparation and definition of a project problem, creation of solution variants and setting evaluation criteria, evaluating options and developing the best solution. Taking into account the review and defined research methodologies (Krakowiak-Bal, Wdowiak, Ziemiańczyk 2017, pp. 118-136), their stages in which solutions are generated can be pointed out. And so in: • the descriptive and improvement approach the stage was described as ‘the critical analysis and evaluation of the empirical material accumulated in the course of observation’, • the functional modeling approach the stage was expressed as ‘the analysis of the latest, model solutions’, • the diagnostic functional approach the stage was defined as ‘a method of idealization in finding optimal solutions’, • the general outline of the above approaches in view of J. Trzcieniecki – in the phase of ‘analysis and assessment of improvements’, • the classical methodology as ‘preparation of conditions and costs’, • the diagnostic methodology as ‘analysis and synthesis’, • the prognostic methodology as ‘building a reference system’ (in the context of purpose, entry, exit, course of organization process, environment, set of system elements), • the study of methods of work as ‘critical analysis and assessment of the facts’, • the analysis of values according to W. Biliński as ‘reflections – creative discussion” and “selection of the optimal solution’, • the analysis of values according to Z. Martyniak as ‘analysis of functions and searching for new solutions’, • the methodology of spatial organization of work as ‘analysis of solution variants’. Basic processes with the application of knowledge, also in rural areas, i.e. operational knowledge management tasks include (Krakowiak-Bal, Łukasik, Mikuła, Pietruszka-Ortyl, Ziemiańczyk 2017, p. 68 et seq.): • identification (localization of knowledge), • transfer (acquiring, disclosing, disseminating knowledge and sharing knowledge), • gathering (systematic collection of knowledge and its codification), • selection of sets of knowledge, • new knowledge creation, • combining sets of knowledge, • saving, or registration of knowledge in a codified form, • storage of knowledge carriers, • assessing the usefulness of knowledge, • applying knowledge (creating visions and concepts of action, solving problems and performing current tasks). Knowledge creation consists in the appropriate selection and use of the specificity of selected methods in knowledge management. This specificity concerns the Japanese methods of so-called continuous improvement in knowledge creation, presented in Chapter 4 of this monograph. The detailed layout of the study presented below was conditioned not only by the assumed aims of the elaboration, but also by the specificity of Anglo-Saxon epistemology, also referred to as the Western or the Japanese epistemology. The mainstay for the notion of knowledge in the western perspective, formulated on the basis of philosophy as ‘justified and true belief’, is the Plato’s idea stating that ‘absolute truth can be derived from rational reasoning based on certain axioms’. This was the cause of criticism by Aristotle who emphasized the pivotal role of sensual perception in this regard. However, the following issues contributed to the success of Plato’s approach (Nonaka, Takeuchi 2000): • Descartes’ rationalism, allowing skepticism with the conviction ‘I think; therefore I am’, • Locke’s empiricism, emphasizing experience as a source of ideas, dividing them into perceptions and reflections, • combination of empiricism with rationalism and Kant’s statement that not all knowledge results from experience, • the Hegelian dialectical unity of opposites, • introduction of interaction between the cognizer and the cognizing person as well as the relationship between man and the environment in Marx’s view, • linking knowledge strictly to Heidegger’s action, rejecting completely the thinking subject in the concept of Descartes, • pragmatism and the statement that ‘only the effective idea is true’, because ideas are devoid of values if they do not go into action, propagated by James. In turn, the Bacon’s concept of operational knowledge which emphasizes social effects and comprises the essence of civilization progress is the foundation of the organizational concept of knowledge in Japanese terms, formulated by I. Nonaka and H. Takeuchi (2000), exposing “the ability of the corporation as a whole to generate new knowledge, its dissemination and embodiment in products, services and systems”. These two perceptions of knowledge, the Anglo-Saxon and the Japanese, form the basis for differentiating in the study two different theoretical approach-es and practical applications of methods for generating solutions (Chapter 2 and 3) and for knowledge creation (Chapter 4). Chapter 1 of the study, consisting of three subchapters, is the background for reflection, emphasizing the role of heuristics, hermeneutics and semiology in the process of building a set of rules for creative thinking and presentation of solutions. The systems of thinking, heuristic and cognitive biases defined by D. Kahneman are the essence of this chapter. The considerations are complemented by hermeneutic analysis and exegesis, the indicated types of heuristics and their characteristics as well as the semiological aspects. Chapter 2, containing three subsequent subchapters, presents the characteristics and typology of selected inventive methods in the context of the basic concepts and evolution of methods. The criteria for division and typologies of the inventive methods precede the characteristics of selected inventive principles and solutions. The possibilities and principles of applying inventive methods are presented in Chapter 3. First, rural areas as the subject of the study are presented (Subchapter 3.1). In the subsequent subchapters theoretical foundations of the theory of creative thinking and knowledge creation (Subchapter 3.2) as well as the methodology of knowledge creation and creatics as the basic research tool (Subchapter 3.3) are discussed. Subchapter 3.4 presents the IDEAL model as the method for formulating decision problems. Inventive methods in organizational design are discussed in Subchapter 3.5 whereas the assumptions of the industrial inventics and the algorithm for inventive problems solving are described in Subchapter 3.6. Subchapter 3.7 concerning the methodology for generating solutions with the indication of inventive methods finalizes the chapter. Chapter 4 deals with corporate models of knowledge organization and methods of knowledge creation. The first group includes and defines the SECI spiral, the OPEC spiral and the DCCV spiral as well as the Gilbert, Probst, Raub and Romhardt’s model. The second one includes: the EDIS spiral of debate in the aspect of the double debate principle (4.2.1.), the Experimental EEIS spiral in the context of verification (4.2.2.), the Hermeneutical EAIR spiral in the context of reflection (4.2.3.), the Triple Helix spiral of knowledge creation processes (4.2.4), the ARME spiral of revolutionary knowledge creation (4.2.5.), the Knowledge Pentagram of Nakamori in the i-System approach (4.2.6.), the Nanadsudaki Septagram of seven spirals of knowledge creation (4.2.7) and the Creative Space model (4.2.8.). In the future, the thematic scope of the study should be enriched with further methods of creative thinking in management, knowledge creation and organization methods as well as considerations regarding models for intellectual resource management in rural organizations. The authors hope that the work will contribute to the dissemination of the inventive methods for generating solutions as well as knowledge creation and organization methods among employees of institutions co-contributing to rural development. It can also become a source of information and a textbook for learning about these methods for students at environmental and agricultural universities. Moreover, it might be a contribution to scientific research in this field.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

knowledge creation; rural development; management; methods

• Wydawca: Stowarzyszenie Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich
• Czasopismo: Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: nr II/2
• Strony: 1--126
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 108 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Krakowiak-Bal A.

• University of Agriculture, Krakow, Poland Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Computer Science 116 B Balicka St., 30-149 Kraków, Poland, Phone: [phone]

autor

Wdowiak W.

• University of Agriculture, Krakow, Poland Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Computer Science 116 B Balicka St., 30-149 Kraków, Poland, Phone: [phone]

autor

Ziemiańczyk U.

• University of Agriculture, Krakow, Poland Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Computer Science 116 B Balicka St., 30-149 Kraków, Poland, Phone: [phone]

Bibliografia

• Altszuller G.S. (1983), Elementy teorii twórczości inżynierskiej [Elements of the Theory of Engineering Creativity], Warsaw.
• Antoszkiewicz J. (1982), Metody heurystyczne [Heuristic Methods], Warsaw.
• Benz H. (1965), Wertanalyse in Praxis, “Rationalilisierung nr 6.
• Boden, M.A. (2004). The Creative Mind: Myths And Mechanisms. Routledge.
• Biliński W., Ceraficki J., Nowakowski A. (1973), Analiza wartości [Value Analysis], Warsaw.
• Bransford J.D., Stein B.S. (1993), The Ideal Problem Solver, New York.
• Budzanowska M. (1967), Próba klasyfikacji metod zarejestrowanych przez A. Molesa [An attempt to classify methods recorded by A Moles], “Prakseologia”, nr 26.
• Chudzian, C., Granat, J., Klimasara, E., Sobieszek, J., & Wierzbicki, A. P. (2011). Wykrywanie wiedzy w dużych zbiorach danych: przykład personalizacji inżynierii ontologicznej [Detection of knowledge in large data sets: an example of personalization of ontology engineering]. Telekomunikacja i techniki informacyjne, 3-26.
• Ćwiklicki M. (2011), Ewolucja metod organizatorskich [Evolution of Organizational Methods], Krakow.
• Doroszewski W., Kurkowska H. (1976), Słownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN [The PWN Great Dictionary of the Correct Polish Language], Warsaw.
• Drozdowski R., Zakrzewska A., Puchalska K., Morchat M., Mroczkowska D. (2010), Wspieranie postaw proinnowacyjnych przez wzmacnianie kreatywności jednostki [Supporting pro-innovative attitudes by enhancing the creativity of an individual]. Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości, Warsaw.
• Encyklopedia katolicka [Catholic Encyclopedia], vol. 12 (2008), Lublin.
• Encyklopedia katolicka [Catholic Encyclopedia], vol. 4 (1989), Lublin.
• Encyklopedia katolicka [Catholic Encyclopedia], vol. 6 (1993), Lublin.
• Encyclopedia of Management (1961), Washington.
• Fazlagić J. (2015), Kreatywni w biznesie [Being Creative in Business], Warsaw.
• Gasson S. (2004) The management of distributed organizational knowledge. In Sprague R.J. (ed) Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. IEEE C.S. Press.
• Gerrig R.J., Zimbardo P.G. (2008), Psychologia i życie [Psychology and Life], Warsaw.
• Gmitrzak D. (2013), Obudź swoją kreatywność [Awaken your Creativity], Gliwice.
• Góralski A. (1980), Twórcze rozwiązywanie zadań [Creative Problem Solving], Warsaw.
• Góralski A. (red.) (1977; 1978; 1980; 1982; 1984), Zadanie metoda rozwiązanie (zbiór 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) [Task Method Solution] (collection 1, 2, 3, 4, 5), Warsaw.
• Grabowska, A., Budohoska, W., & Kozielecki, J. (1998). Procesy percepcji, myślenie, rozwiązywanie problemów i podejmowanie decyzji [Perception Processes, Thinking, Problem Solving and Decision Making]. PWN, Warsaw.
• Guilford, J. P. (1978). Natura inteligencji człowieka [Nature of Human Intelligence]. Pan. Wyd. Naukowe.
• Guiraud P. (1974), Semiologia [Semiology], Warsaw.
• Guiraud P. (1976), Semantyka [Semantics], Warsaw.
• Hartkopf W. (1976), Zum Grundsatzlichen der Problematik einer allgemeinen Heuristic. Materiały III Sympozjum: Metody heurezy, Warsaw.
• Hedlund G. (1994), A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 15, Special Issue: Strategy: Search for New Paradigms (Summer).
• Honderich T. (red.), (1998), Encyklopedia filozofii [Encyclopedia of Philosophy], Poznań.
• Hurliman W. (1974), Probleme losen-wie?, Industrielle Organization, nr 2.
• Hurlock E. (1985), Rozwój dziecka [Child Development], Warsaw.
• Jarugowa A. (1986), Rachunek kosztów w zarządzaniu przedsiębiorstwem [Cost Accounting in Enterprise Management], Warsaw.
• Kahneman D. (2012), Pułapki myślenia. O myśleniu szybkim i wolnym [Thinking, Fast and Slow], Poznań.
• Karwowski M. (2009), Zgłębianie kreatywności. Studia nad pomiarem poziomu i stylu twórczości [Exploring creativity. Studies on the measurement of the level and style of creativity], Warsaw.
• Kłak M. (2010), Zarządzanie wiedzą we współczesnym przedsiębiorstwie [Knowledge Management in a Modern Enterprise], Kielce.
• Kolman R. (1973), Ilościowe określanie jakości [Quantitative Quality Determination], Warsaw.
• Kolman R. (2009), Kwalitologia. Wiedza o różnych dziedzinach jakości [Qualitology, Knowledge about Various Areas of Quality], Warsaw.
• Kozarkiewicz A. (2015), Zarządzanie projektami kreatywnymi [Creative Project Management], “Marketing i Rynek”, nr 9.
• Kozielecki J. (1969), Rozwiązywanie problemów [Problem Solving], Warsaw.
• Krakowiak-Bal A., Łukasik P., Mikuła B., Pietruszka-Ortyl A., Ziemiańczyk U. (2017), Zarządzanie wiedzą w rozwoju obszarów wiejskich [Knowledge Management in Rural Development], Warsaw.
• Krakowiak-Bal A., Wdowiak W., Ziemiańczyk U. (2017), Standardy organizacyjne a rozwój obszarów wiejskich w kontekście zarządzania informacją i wiedzą [Organizational Standards and Rural Development in the Context of Information and Knowledge Management], Warsaw.
• Kramer F., Appelt H.G. (1978), Innowacje w przemyśle [Innovations in Industry], Warsaw.
• Kunifuji S., Kawaji T., Onabuta T., Hirata T., Saka moto R., and Kato N. (2004) Creativity support systems in JAIST. Proceedings of JAIST Forum 2004: Technology Creation Based on Knowledge Science, pp 56-58.
• Kunifuji, S. Kato N., Wierzbicki A.P. (2007) Creativity Support in Brainstorming w: Wierzbicki A.P., Nakamori Y.(ed.) Creative Environments, op.cit., str. 93-126.
• Lisiński M. (1992), Wariantowanie w projektowaniu organizatorskim [Varianting in organisational design], Krakow.
• Lisiński M., Martyniak Z. (1978), Analiza wartości systemów organizacyjnych [Analysis of the value of organizational systems], Krakow.
• Martyniak Z. (1978), Główne “rodziny” metod organizatorskich i zasady ich praktycznego wykorzystania [The main ‘families’ of organisaitonal methods and the principles of their practical use] (in): Materiały na konferencję naukową PTE nt. Wykorzystanie technik organizatorskich w przemyśle, Radom.
• Martyniak Z. (1985), Inwentyka przemysłowa [Industrial inventics], Warsaw.
• Martyniak Z. (1987), Organizatoryka [The Science of Organisation], Warsaw.
• Martyniak Z. (1997), Wstęp do inwentyki [An Introduction to Inventiveness], Krakow.
• McAdam R., McCreedy S. (1999), A critical review of knowledge management models, The Learning Organization, MCB UP Ltd, Aug 1999 Volume: 6 Issue: 3.
• Mikołajczyk Z. (1994), Techniki organizatorskie w rozwiązywaniu problemów zarządzania [Organizational techniques in solving management problems], Warsaw.
• Mikuła B. (2007b), Zarządzanie wiedzą w organizacji, (w:) B. Mikuła, A. PietruszkaOrtyl, A. Potocki (red.), Podstawy zarządzania przedsiębiorstwami w gospodarce opartej na wiedzy [The Basics of Business Management in Knowledge-based Economy], Centrum Doradztwa i Informacji Difin, sp. z o.o, Warsaw.
• Mikuła B., Ziemiańczyk U., Krakowiak-Bal A., Pietruszka-Ortyl A., Łukasik P. (2017), Zarządzanie wiedzą w rozwoju obszarów wiejskich [Knowledge management in rural development], Warsaw.
• Moles A., Caude R. (1970), Creativite et methodes d’innovation, Paris.
• Motycka, A. (1998). Nauka a nieświadomość. Filozofia nauki wobec kontekstu tworzenia [Science and the unawareness. Philosophy of science in the context of creation], wyd. Fundacji na Rzecz Nauki Polskiej, Wroclaw.
• Mouchot J.M., Moles A. (1971), Le methode des sciences humaines daus l’entreprise, Paris.
• Nakamori, Y. 2016. Knowledge Synthesis: Western and Eastern Cultural Perspectives. Translational Systems Sciences. doi:10.1007/978-4-431-55218-5.
• Nakamori, Y., & Wierzbicki, A. P. (2012). Knowledge pentagram system and applications. In Modeling for Decision Support in Network-Based Services (pp. 257-278). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Nakamori, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2004). Exploring a Sociologist Underpinning for the i System. International Journal of Knowledge and System Sciences, 1(1), 1-8.
• Nałczadżjan A. (1979), Intuicja a odkrycie naukowe [Intuition and scientific discovery], Warsaw.
• Network for Innovation in Agriculture ... (2015). “Sieć na rzecz innowacji w rolnictwie i na obszarach wiejskich sposobem na zapewnienie zrównoważonego i inteligentnego rozwoju polskiej wsi” [“The network for innovation in agriculture and rural areas as a way to ensure sustainable and intelligent development of the Polish countryside”] (2015). Materiały konferencyjne opracowane przez Instytut Technologiczno-Przyrodniczy w Falentach, na zlecenie Centrum Doradztwa Rolniczego w Brwinowie, we współpracy z IUNiG-PIB w Puławach, IO w Skierniewicach, IHiAR-PIB w Radzikowie, IW-PIB w Puławach.
• Nęcka E. (1994), Twórcze rozwiązywanie problemów [Creative problem solving], Krakow.
• Nęcka E. (2012), Psychologia twórczości [Psychology of creativity], Sopot.
• Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. (2000), Kreowanie wiedzy w organizacji [The knowledge creating company], Polska Fundacja Promocji Kadr, Warsaw.
• Nonaka I, Takeuchi H.(1995), The Knowledge-Creating Company How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0195092694.
• Nonaka I.(1991). The knowledge creating company. Harvard Business Review, no. 69, pp. 96-104.
• Nonaka I., Konno N. (1998), The concept of „Ba”: Building foundation for Knowledge Creation. California Management Review Vol 40, No.3 Spring.
• Nowak S. (2010), Metodologia badań społecznych [Methodology of Social Research], Warsaw.
• Nickerman R. (2003), Enhancing Creativity, (w:) Handbook of Creativity, R.J. Stenberg (red.), Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
• Osborn A. (1957), Applied Imagination, New York.
• Polya G. (1993), Jak to rozwiązać? [How to solve it?], Warsaw.
• Poskrobko B. (2017), Nauka o kreowaniu wiedzy. Podręcznik kreatywnego naukowca i menedżera [The Science of Knowledge Creation. A Manual for a creative scientist and a manager], Warsaw.
• Probst G., Raub S., Romhardt K. (2002), Zarządzanie wiedzą w organizacji [Knowledge management in the organization], Krakow.
• Proctor T. (1998), Zarządzanie twórcze [Creative management], Warsaw.
• Puszkin B. (1970), Heurystyka [Heuristics], Warsaw.
• Rhodes M. (1961), An Analysis of Creativity, Phi-Delta, Kappan 1961.
• Sapa R. (2009), Metodologia badań obszaru pośredniczenia w komunikacji naukowej z perspektywy nauki o informacji [Methodology of research in the area of mediation in scientific communication from the perspective of information science], Krakow.
• Sawicki K. (red.) (1996), Rachunek kosztów [Cost Accounting] (vol. II), Warsaw.
• Schulz R. (1990). Twórczość. Społeczne aspekty zjawiska [Creation. Social aspects of the phenomenon]. Warsaw.
• Skrzypek A. (2013), Przesłanki kreowania wiedzy w organizacji w świetle wyników badań [Premises for knowledge creation in the organization in the light of research results], Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Przyrodniczo-Humanistycznego w Siedlcach. Administracja i Zarządzanie (26), nr 99.
• Słownik filozofii. Zagadnienia pojęcia terminy [Dictionary of Philosophy. Issues Concept Terms] (2011), Warsaw.
• Sobańska I. (red.) (2003), Rachunek kosztów i rachunkowość zarządcza [Cost and management accounting], Warsaw.
• Stabryła A., Trzcieniecki J. (1980), Zagadnienia metodologii badania systemów zarządzania [Issues of the Research Methodology of Management Systems], Krakow. Stasiakiewicz M. (1999). Twórczość i interakcja [Creativity and interaction]. Poznań: Wyd. Naukowe UAM.
• Szmidt K. J. (2007). Pedagogika twórczości [The Pedagogy of Creativity]. Gdańsk: GWP.
• Szmidt K.J. (2010), ABC kreatywności [The ABC of Creativity], Warsaw.
• Szopiński T.(2013), Kreatywność i jej znaczenie w biznesie [Creativity and its importance in business], (in:) Metody i techniki pobudzania kreatywności w organizacji i zarządzaniu, red. A.Kosieradzka. Wydawnictwo edu-Libri, Krakow-Warsaw.
• Sztumski J. (2005), Wstęp do metod i technik badań społecznych [Introduction to social research methods and techniques], Katowice.
• Tatarkiewicz W. (1975), Dzieje sześciu pojęć: sztuka, piękno, forma, twórczość, odtwórczość, przeżycia estetyczne [A history of six ideas: art, beauty, form, creativity, reproduction, aesthetic experience], Warsaw.
• Torrance E.P. (1962), Guiding creative talent, Englewood Cliffs, N.Y. Prentice-Hall. Trias de Bes (2013).
• Tsubaki, H., Nishina, K., & Yamada, S. (Eds.). (2008). The Grammar of Technology Development. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Ujwary-Gil A. (2004), Inwentyka czyli kreatywność w biznesie [Inventiveness or Creativity in Business]. Wybrane zagadnienia, Nowy Sącz.
• Van Gundy A.B. (1988), Techniques of Structured Problem Solving, New York.
• VDI - Richtlinien (1965), “Wertanalyse”, “Rationalilisierung” nr 2801.
• Waisburd G. (1996). Creatividad y transformaciones. Trillas, Mexico.
• Wdowiak W. (1980a), Analiza wartości wybranych dokumentów procedury planistycznej [Analysis of the value of selected documents of the planning procedure], “Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, nr 133, Krakow.
• Wdowiak W. (1980b), Badanie metod pracy biurowej[Study on the office work methods], Krakow.
• Wdowiak W. (1980c), Technika delficka [The Delphi Technique], “Problemy Postępu Technicznego”, nr 1.
• Wdowiak W. (1983), Badanie potrzeb informacyjnych w układach informacyjnodecyzyjnych [Study on information needs in information-decision systems], “Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, nr 177, Krakow.
• Wdowiak W. (1986), Analiza wartości systemu informacyjno-decyzyjnego [Analysis of the Value of the Information and Decision System, “Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, nr 214, Krakow.
• Wdowiak W. (2013), Metoda analizy progowej w zarządzaniu przedsiębiorstwem [Threshold Analysis Method in Enterprise Management], Warsaw.
• Wierzbicki A.P. (1997), On the role of intuition in decision making and some ways of multicriteria aid of intuition. Multiple Criteria Decision Making 6:65-78.
• Wierzbicki, A. P. (2012). Zarządzanie wiedzą a projekt i eksploatacja Kolei Dużych Prędkości [Knowledge Management and High Speed Rail Project and Exploitation]. Logistyka. Warsaw.
• Wierzbicki, A.P. Nakamori, Y. (2006), Creative Space: Models of Creative Processes for the Knowledge Civilization Age, volume 10 of Studies in Computational Intelligence. Berlin, Springer.
• Wierzbicki, A.P. Nakamori, Y. (2007). Creative Environments: Issues of Creativity Support for the Knowledge Civilization Age. vol. 59 of Studies in Computational Intelligence. Berlin, Springer.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1922), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Cambridge University Press.
• Woodman R. W., Sawyer J. E.,Griffin R. W. (1993), Toward a Theory of Organizational Creativity, Academy of Management Review, nr 2/18.
• Zorska A., Molęda-Zdziech M., Jung B. (2014), Kreatywność i innowacyjność w erze cyfrowej [Creativity and Innovation in the Digital Era]. Twórcza destrukcja 2, Warsaw.
• Yourdon E. (1996), Współczesna analiza strukturalna [Contemporary Structural Analysis], Warsaw.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2019).