chapter one - Griffith Research Online - Griffith University

Relationships among Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilisation in the CRC Process.

Lisa G.A. Beesley B.A. (Psychology) Honours

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Marketing and Management, Griffith University, Faculty of Commerce and Management.

February, 2003.

This work has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself.

Lisa Beesley

- ii -

ABSTRACT Tourism has come to be recognised as a major contributor to national economies.

In a knowledge-based economy (that emphasises the benefits of

industry/government and academic research), a strong research base must underpin management of a tourist destination if it is to realise its full potential.

The

establishment of collaborative networks between industry, academia, and government in the strategic planning and management of cities and towns is becoming increasingly popular.

However, the way in which the processes

underlying these settings facilitate or inhibit eventual outcomes is poorly understood. If knowledge is to drive innovation and economic growth optimally, it is important not just to develop an understanding of the processes underlying the creation, diffusion and utilisation of knowledge in cooperative research settings, but also the relationships among them. Accordingly, the aim of this investigation is to examine the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation occurring in the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program, specifically, the Gold Coast Visioning Project, with a view to identifying the most efficient means for formulating and disseminating research designed for industry and/or government application. Knowledge is defined as information that is imbued with meaning or relevance. However, this definition says little of the ways that individuals, groups and organisations acquire knowledge. While cognitive psychologists have produced several theories suggesting the structure and mechanisms of individual cognitive processes underlying the acquisition and use of knowledge, social scientists have

- iii -

sought to describe and explain the process by investigating the influence of social factors. Recent contributions to group learning have examined group composition, group size, familiarity among group members, and communication processes in an attempt to understand the ways in which groups acquire knowledge. Research shows that knowledge utilisation in organisations results from the interdependent influences of organisational processes and the control opportunities and control problems that arise through organisational structure. These frameworks provide accounts of how knowledge is utilised within an organisation, but not of how organisations learn. Recent research suggests that organisations learn through knowledge networks where organisational focus moves from the consideration and protection of boundaries to the management of (and care for) relationships. Therefore, organisations contain static (rules, norms and procedures) and dynamic (social relationships) elements that mutually influence the degree to which organisations learn. A synthesis of the available literature resulted in the development of a series of models that served not only to inform, but also be informed by the analysis of this investigation. A single case study, namely the Gold Coast Visioning Project, was used to examine the ways in which knowledge was created, disseminated and utilised in a CRC setting.

This ethnographic investigation considered the process of

knowledge creation through to utilisation at individual, group, organisational, and inter-organisational levels, while simultaneously examining the interrelated influences of social, cognitive, affective and communication factors. Throughout the project, data were collected through stakeholder interviews, various documents and participant observation of stakeholder meetings and workshops. Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach and methods of thick description.

- iv -

The results show that researchers and industry stakeholders bring different frames of reference, different expectations, and different knowledge bases to the exercise. This inhibited communication, and gave the appearance of dissension when, in fact, what was being sought was a common frame for understanding and communication. Additionally, the gap between industry and researcher worldviews generated the sense that industry was resisting or failing to understand what the research was seeking to achieve. Consequently, in order to manage the relationship, research plans and findings were communicated to industry in a teacher-to-student fashion, which fostered single-loop learning, and reduced industry stakeholders’ sense of ownership in the process and findings.

During the project, industry

stakeholders frequently sought to have research come pre-packaged with “meaning”, but researchers lacked the contextual knowledge necessary to specify the relevance of their research. The results also show that research findings need to be integrated and diffused to industry over time, and specific applications need to be formulated (and reformulated) in response to particular and changing needs of industry. As a result of this investigation, a model of ‘best practice’ has been developed with detailed recommendations for the design, implementation, and reporting of CRC-sponsored research to optimise its utility for end-users of such research. From a theoretical perspective, the findings of this study challenge the ways that current theories account for the ways in which knowledge is acquired and utilised since the results show that knowledge is constructed both socially and emotionally. Any investigation that seeks to understand how knowledge is acquired and utilised must consider social and affective influences. To ignore the role of emotion and values in the process of knowledge acquisition is to ignore a key component of an individual’s reasoning capacity.

-v-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................iii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... xi

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................. xii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................ 1

The Problem ........................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Tri-lateral Arrangements of Knowledge Production .................................. 3

1.2 Collaborative Tourism Arrangements ......................................................... 4

1.3 The Acquisition of Knowledge..................................................................... 5

1.3.1 Individual Knowledge Acquisition ......................................................... 6

1.3.2 Group Knowledge Acquisition ............................................................... 6

1.3.3 Organisational and Inter-organisational Knowledge Acquisition ........ 7

1.4 Rationale....................................................................................................... 9

1.5 Philosophical Underpinnings .................................................................... 14

1.6 Thesis Outline............................................................................................. 16

CHAPTER TWO ..................................................................................................... 18

The Cooperative Research Centres Program.................................................... 18

2.1 Background ................................................................................................ 19

2.2 The Relationship between Science and Society. ....................................... 21

2.3 Government Priorities in Science Policy................................................... 22

2.4 Sustainable Development as a Priority...................................................... 23

2.5 The Evolution of Science ........................................................................... 26

2.6 The Symbiotic Nature of Knowledge Production...................................... 27

2.7 Tri-lateral Arrangements of Knowledge Production ................................ 32

2.8 The Cooperative Research Centres Program............................................ 35

2.8.1 Australia’s Response to Domestic and Global Challenges................. 36

2.9 The CRC for Sustainable Tourism ............................................................ 42

2.10 Collaborative Tourism Arrangements ..................................................... 43

CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................. 48

Knowledge Defined .............................................................................................. 48

3.1 Definitions of Knowledge........................................................................... 48

CHAPTER FOUR.................................................................................................... 61

Individual Knowledge Acquisition ..................................................................... 61

4.1 Cognitive Underpinnings of Knowledge Acquisition................................ 63

4.2 Connectionist Networks ............................................................................. 66

4.3 Conditions for the Restructuring of Networks. ......................................... 69

4.4 Priming as Network Mobilisation.............................................................. 72

4.5 The Role of Affect in Knowledge Acquisition ........................................... 74

4.6 Taxonomy of Working Memory................................................................. 76

- vi -

4.7 The Function of Heuristics........................................................................ 78

4.8 The Role of Creativity in Knowledge Acquisition. .................................... 80

4.9 Scientific Knowledge as a Process of Construction.................................. 82

CHAPTER FIVE...................................................................................................... 85

Group Knowledge Acquisition............................................................................ 85

5.1 Social Processes ......................................................................................... 86

5.2 Priming in Groups...................................................................................... 88

5.3 The Role of Creativity in Group Knowledge Acquisition. ........................ 90

5.4 Group Composition and Creativity ............................................................ 91

5.6 Groups as ‘Cognitive Misers’ .................................................................... 93

5.8 Social Contingencies in Group Knowledge Acquisition........................... 95

5.9 The Role of Affect in Group Knowledge Acquisition ............................... 96

5.10 Emotional Contagion ............................................................................... 99

5.11 Knowledge Dissemination...................................................................... 103

CHAPTER SIX ...................................................................................................... 110

Knowledge Acquisition at Organisational and Inter-organisational Levels 110

6.1 Organisational Learning ......................................................................... 111

6.2 Networks and Knowledge Management .................................................. 116

6.3 Models of Policymaking........................................................................... 125

6.3.1 Bounded Rationality........................................................................... 125

6.3.2 Incrementalism................................................................................... 126

6.3.3 Garbage Can Model of Decision Making .......................................... 129

6.3.4 Levels of Analysis in Policy Making ................................................. 135

6.3.5 Agenda Setting ................................................................................... 137

6.4 Collaborative Visioning Arrangements ................................................... 140

6.4.1 Atlanta 2020 ....................................................................................... 141

6.4.2 Hopevalley Project............................................................................. 143

6.4.3 Balance of Power ............................................................................... 146

6.5 Synthesis ................................................................................................... 149

CHAPTER SEVEN................................................................................................ 151

Synthesis.............................................................................................................. 151

7.1 Individual Cognitive Processes................................................................ 155

7.2 Group Knowledge Acquisition ................................................................. 158

CHAPTER EIGHT ................................................................................................ 162

Method ................................................................................................................ 162

8.1 Methodologies .......................................................................................... 162

8.2 Data Collection......................................................................................... 172

8.2.1 Meetings ............................................................................................. 173

8.2.2 Interviews ........................................................................................... 173

8.2.3 Documents.......................................................................................... 173

8.2.4 Workshops .......................................................................................... 174

8.3 Gold Coast City......................................................................................... 176

8.4 The Gold Coast as a Maturing Tourist Destination ............................... 178

8.5 Background of the Gold Coast as Tourist Destination........................... 181

- vii -

CHAPTER NINE ................................................................................................... 188

The Gold Coast Visioning Project .................................................................... 188

9.1 The Gold Coast Visioning Process .......................................................... 190

9.1.1 Rationale for the Visioning Approach ............................................... 190

9.1.2 Objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project ................................ 190

9.1.3 Techniques Employed ........................................................................ 192

Visioning ......................................................................................................... 194

9.2 Scope of Collaboration............................................................................. 195

9.3 Timing and Intensity of Collaboration.................................................... 196

9.4 Degree of Consensus................................................................................ 197

9.5 Methods for Achieving Stakeholder Involvement................................... 198

9.6 Analytic Synthesis .................................................................................... 203

CHAPTER TEN ..................................................................................................... 210

Organisational and Inter-organisational Learning Analysis ......................... 210

10.1 The Launch of the Gold Coast Visioning Project................................. 211

10.2 Levels of Organisational and Inter-organisational Learning .............. 233

10.3 Concluding Analysis .............................................................................. 242

CHAPTER ELEVEN............................................................................................. 246

Group Learning Analysis .................................................................................. 246

11.1 Stakeholder Meetings and Reference Groups....................................... 247

11.2 2020 Visioning Workshops .................................................................... 257

11.2.1 Workshop One – Futures Workshop ................................................ 258

11.2.2 Workshop Two – Visioning Workshop ............................................. 267

11.3 Analytic Synthesis .................................................................................. 275

CHAPTER TWELVE............................................................................................ 278

The Creation, Dissemination and Utilisation of Knowledge in Individuals . 278

12.1 The Creation of Knowledge ................................................................... 279

12.2 Communication Methods....................................................................... 282

12.3 The Role of Affect in Individual Knowledge Acquisition..................... 288

12.4 Social Influences in Knowledge Acquisition ........................................ 294

12.5 Analytic Synthesis .................................................................................. 296

CHAPTER THIRTEEN ........................................................................................ 299

Synthesis of Results ............................................................................................ 299

13.1 Nature and Scope of Collaboration ....................................................... 299

13.2 Emergent Phenomena at an Organisational and Inter-organisational

Level................................................................................................................. 301

13.2.1 Socio-political Factors..................................................................... 302

13.2.2 Methods of Communication ............................................................. 305

13.3 Emergent Phenomena at a Group Level ............................................... 307

13.4 Emergent Phenomena at an Individual Level ...................................... 310

13.5 The Relationships among Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and

Utilisation ........................................................................................................ 312

CHAPTER FOURTEEN ....................................................................................... 318

Theoretical and Practical Implications ............................................................ 318

- viii -

14.1 Theoretical Implications ........................................................................ 319

14.1.1 Ontological Assumptions ................................................................. 319

14.1.2 The Role of Affect in Knowledge Acquisition................................... 322

14.1.3 The Sleeper Effect ............................................................................ 324

14.1.4 Cognitive Processes in Knowledge Acquisition.............................. 326

14.1.5 Group Polarisation and Affect ......................................................... 327

14.1.6 Knowledge Networks and Creativity................................................ 328

14.1.7 The Emergence of Trust in Collaborative Research Settings .......... 330

14.1.8 Scope, Timing and Intensity of Collaboration ................................. 331

14.2 Generalisability of the Findings ............................................................ 331

14.3 Practical Implications ............................................................................ 333

14.3.1 Emotional Contagion and the Uptake of Knowledge....................... 336

14.3.2 Understanding Knowledge Processes.............................................. 337

14.3.3 Setting the Research Agenda........................................................... 338

14.3.4 The Dissemination of Research Output ........................................... 340

14.4 Science Policy and the Institution of Science ....................................... 342

14.4.1 Bridging the Cultural Divide ........................................................... 343

14.5 Conclusion............................................................................................... 348

REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 350

APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................... 396

List of Meetings and Interviews........................................................................ 396

APPENDIX B ......................................................................................................... 399

List of Equipment............................................................................................... 399

APPENDIX C ......................................................................................................... 403

Workshop Participants...................................................................................... 403

APPENDIX D ......................................................................................................... 406

Key Stakeholders in the Gold Coast Visioning Project .................................. 406

APPENDIX E ......................................................................................................... 410

Research Objectives and Findings.................................................................... 410

APPENDIX F.......................................................................................................... 440

Tourism Synergies Associated with Key Industry Strategies Identified in the

GCCC Economic Strategy................................................................................. 440

APPENDIX G ......................................................................................................... 442

Items requiring responses by participants in the Visioning Workshop........ 442

APPENDIX H ......................................................................................................... 443

List of Acronyms ................................................................................................ 443

- ix -

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1

Features of deep and surface approaches to learning ...............

53

Table 3.2

Categorical descriptions of the structure of knowledge…….…

55

Table 6.1

Framework in which to assess collaborative arrangements…….. 144

Table 8.1

Indicators of stagnation……………………………………......

184

Table 9.1

Rationale for the Gold Coast Visioning Project………………

191

Table 9.2

Techniques to achieve meaningful stakeholder engagement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project……………………………..

194

Table A.1

List of meetings attended…………………………………..….

396

Table A.2

List of interviews………………………………………....…….

398

Table C.1

Workshop participants – Gold Coast Tourism Futures Workshop.............…………………………………….....…........ 403

Table C.2

Workshop participants – Gold Coast Tourism Visioning Workshop.............…………………………………….....…........ 404

Table D.1

Key stakeholders in the Gold Coast Visioning Project................

Table F.1

Tourism synergies associated with key industry strategies identified in the GCCC Economic Strategy.................................

-x-

406

441

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1

An ideological continuum of sustainable development perspectives…………………………………………………..

25

Figure 2.1

Traditional linear model of applied research...............……..

29

Figure 2.3

Quadrant model of scientific research………………………..

30

Figure 2.4

The

triple-helix

model

indicating

the

overlapping

institutional spheres of industry, government and academic research groups………………………………………………

32

Figure 3.1

The hierarchical structure of knowledge……………………..

50

Figure 3.2

Bateson’s (1973) Levels of learning ........................................

52

Figure 4.1

A multi-layered connectionist network showing an input layer,

internal

representation

layer

and

an

output

layer…………………………………………………………... 67 Figure 4.2

The dimensions of working memory……..………………….

Figure 6.1

A framework of knowledge networks depicting static and dynamic elements……………………………………..……...

Figure 6.2

77

120

The dynamic transformation process between explicit and tacit knowledge………………………………………..……..

121

Figure 7.1

The interrelated levels of learning……………………………

152

Figure 7.2

A model of factors influencing the acquisition, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge……………………….………..

Figure 7.3

154

A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at an individual level……………………………..……………..

- xi -

157

Figure 7.4

A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at a group level………………………………………………….

159

Figure 8.1

Geographical location of Gold Coast City……………..…….

177

Figure 8.2

Tourist Area Lifecycle Model…………………………..……

179

Figure 8.3

Trends in international visitor numbers to the Gold Coast….

184

Figure 8.4

Trends in domestic visitor numbers to the Gold Coast….…..

184

Figure 8.5

Gold Coast Visioning Process………………….……………

186

Figure 9.1

A framework for destination strategic planning and

management…………………………………………………..

Figure 13.1

Diagrammatic representation of the scope and intensity of

collaboration in the Gold Coast Visioning Project……..…….

Figure 13.2

193

301

Model of factors influencing the acquisition, dissemination

and utilisation of knowledge..................................................... 314

Figure 13.3

Model of factors influencing the acquisition, dissemination

and utilisation of knowledge across levels of learning.............

Figure 14.1

316

A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at

an individual level as a function of time……………..………. 328

Figure 14.2

Prescriptive model of collaborative research processes……...

Figure 14.3

A model of university, industry and government relations

depicting interaction but not interconnectedness………….…

Figure B.1

334

344

Schematic diagram of Grouputer© microphone and keyboard

placements……………………………………………………. 400

Figure B.2

Grouputer GDSS user interface………..……………………..

- xii -

402

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the following people for their contributions to this thesis: School of Marketing and Management Thanks must go to the many staff and fellow students within the School, for your endless encouragement and support. I would also like to thank Prof. Liz Fulop for her willingness to act as Associate Supervisor at short notice. Dr Liz Conlon For your continual support and encouragement, and for your ability to laugh at life. My fellow Postgraduate students In particular, Tess Collie, Lee-Ann Prideaux, Sheranne Fairley, and Graeme Deeth, who have helped to make the process an enjoyable one. Thank you for your friendship and support. To my daughter, Bianca Thank you for your patience during the many times I was ‘missing in action’. To Roy Thank you for helping me find the courage in myself to embark upon this journey. Through you I have learned of my strengths. Thank you for being there. To Mum Thank you for just being you, for believing in me, and for being there. And, finally to my Primary Supervisor, Prof. Laurence Chalip Thank you for giving me the freedom to think for myself, while at the same time, through your guidance and unending support, making me see further than I thought was possible. Thank you for believing in me, especially the times when I didn’t, and finally, thank you for being my friend.

- xiii -

In memory of Professor Bill Faulkner A man who was a great teacher and scholar, a true visionary, and friend.

- xiv -

Knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation

1

CHAPTER ONE The Problem

In recent times, debate has raged over the changing nature of science and the implications of that change (Gibbons et al., 1994; Kuhn, 1970; Ziman, 1994). In order to drive economic growth, recent government policy in many developed nations demands greater interaction among industry, government and institutions of science in the production of knowledge in order to stimulate innovation and productivity (DETYA, 1999, 2000; DISR, 2000; House Committee on Science, 1998; Industry Canada, 1997; Walker, 1997). While it is widely accepted that science is currently undergoing a major transformation, there remains a reluctance to embrace changes so that the utility of science is maximised (Healy, 1997). There are those who have sought to capture the essence of the current transformation and, in so doing, have proposed a future for science where the traditional academic mode of knowledge production is replaced by a revolutionary, irrevocable, world-wide transformation in the way science is organised and performed (Etzkowitz, Webster, Gebhardt, & Terra, 2000; Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996; Ziman, 1994). Tourism research is one realm in which the changes to science have become manifest. Tourism is recognised as a major contributor to regional economies (OECD, 2000). In Australia, tourism comprises 4.7% of the economy and directly employs 551, 000 people (Hockey, 2002). In a knowledge-based economy, a strong research base is needed to underpin the management of a tourist destination if that destination is to realise its full potential (Innes, 1996; van den Heijden, 1997). At the same time, management of a destination should adhere to the principles of sustainable


2

development (Burr, 1995; Hunter, 1997; Murphy, 1994; Tisdell, 1990; Weaver & Lawton, 1998). A popular means of realising a destination management approach (Helling, 1998) has been for industry and government stakeholders to collaborate with academic researchers to develop visions of a preferred future, which might then guide the planning and management of a destination (Chrislip & Larson, 1994; Healey, 1998; Helling, 1998; Innes & Boohar, 1999). These tri-lateral arrangements (industry, government and academic research) are commonly referred to as cooperative or collaborative research settings. They represent a paradigm by which nations might participate more effectively in a knowledge-based economy. The recent popularity of these collaborative research undertakings belies the fact that the way in which the underlying processes facilitate or inhibit eventual outcomes remains poorly understood. If knowledge is to drive innovation and economic growth optimally, it is important not just to develop an understanding of the processes underlying the creation, diffusion and utilisation of knowledge in cooperative research settings, but also the relationships among them. Accordingly, the aim of this investigation is to examine the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in a collaborative research undertaking with a view to identifying the most efficient means for formulating and disseminating research designed for industry and/or government application. To understand the ways in which knowledge moves within collaborative research settings and the factors that either enhance or inhibit eventual outcomes, it is necessary to approach the investigation from a broad perspective. That is, in order to identify and better understand how knowledge emerging in tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production moves through to eventual utilisation, it is important to


3

examine the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge at individual, group, organisational, and inter-organisational levels.

From this perspective it is then

possible to identify the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilisation, not just within each level of analysis, but the relationships that might also exist among those levels. Additionally, this comprehensive approach to the current investigation makes it possible to recognise the dynamics occurring in a collaborative research setting, and the influence such dynamics might have on the eventual utilisation of the research findings produced. These tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production are sometimes described as triple helix arrangements. The Triple Helix model (discussed in greater detail in Chapter Two)(Leydesdorff, 2000) has recently been offered as a means to better understand the dynamics occurring in collaborative research arrangements. 1.1 Tri-lateral Arrangements of Knowledge Production The Triple Helix model (Leydesdorff, 2000) concentrates on the network overlay of communications that reshape the institutional arrangements among researchers, industries and governments.

This model (see Figure 2.3, p. 32)

describes how a new knowledge infrastructure is generated in terms of overlapping institutional spheres, with hybrid organisations emerging at the interfaces.

The

aggregated relationships within the triple helix spawn interactive offshoots of intentions, strategies, and projects. In turn, this creates added value by constantly reorganising and synthesising the institutional infrastructures in order to achieve at the least, outcomes adjacent to the goals. These interactive offshoots transform through interaction among actors within the triple helix. This suggests that the process of knowledge production in collaborative arrangements is anything but linear. A greater understanding of the dynamics involved in this process is needed if


4

the full benefits of this emergent form of scientific enquiry are to be realised (Turpin, 1997). Although little is known about the ways that the dynamics of cooperative research settings influence the eventual production of knowledge, the perception that collaborative research will make important contributions to a knowledge-based economy continues to gain momentum (Etzkowitz, Webster, & Healey, 1998). Furthermore, Federal mandates in both developed and developing nations have seen widespread involvement of industry, government, and academia in collaborative research efforts.

Australia’s response to the demands of a knowledge-based

economy has been the establishment of the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program. Established in 1990, the CRC program is designed to encourage the formation of collaborative knowledge networks with a view to producing research that is of immediate use to industry, which will in turn, lead to innovative practices that make positive economic contributions. 1.2 Collaborative Tourism Arrangements The establishment of collaborative networks between industry, science, and government in the strategic planning and management of cities and towns is becoming increasingly popular (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Helling, 1998). Often referred to as ‘Visioning projects’, these collaborative arrangements engage researchers and stakeholders in a process that involves building a shared vision for the future, developing scenarios that describe those possible futures, developing a learning culture among the stakeholders, and management of the tension between autonomy and cooperation among stakeholders.

This process is generally

underpinned by an audit process involving an integrated series of research projects aimed at overviewing the current status of the region, city or town.

This

investigative process considers the area under investigation in social, economic, and


5

environmental terms. In line with traditional strategic planning (Getz, 1986; Gunn, 1994; Inskeep, 1991), this audit process is antecedent to the Visioning process. To realise the contribution that knowledge created in collaborative settings might make to strategic planning and management of a tourist destination, it is necessary to understand how knowledge is acquired, and to identify the factors that enhance or impinge upon this acquisition and eventual utilisation. 1.3 The Acquisition of Knowledge The way in which knowledge is acquired has been a source of fascination and constant subject of investigation since the earliest civilisations. This enquiry has evolved to the extent that knowledge acquisition is now considered at individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels.

While there are many

definitions and categorisations of knowledge, there is a common theme among them — knowledge is information that is imbued with meaning or relevance (Bhatt, 2000). Therefore, for the purpose of this thesis, knowledge will be taken to mean information to which relevance or meaning has been attributed . It is the attribution of relevance or meaning to information that constitutes learning — acquiring knowledge is a process of learning. Additionally, the attribution of relevance or meaning to information also demands some level of decision making.

What

information is relevant and in what ways is it relevant? Decision making theory is not traditionally framed in terms of learning theory, but rather as choice.

However, if choices are to be made as to what

information is relevant, and how it might be relevant, then it is appropriate to draw on decision making theories in an attempt to better understand the ways in which knowledge is acquired in tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production. Therefore, if we are to develop an understanding of the dynamics of knowledge


6

production in collaborative research settings, it is necessary to understand decision making processes at an individual, group, and organisational level, not just as knowledge is acquired, but also as it is drawn upon for organisational application. 1.3.1 Individual Knowledge Acquisition How individuals acquire and utilise knowledge has been the focus of much research. Social scientists have sought to describe and explain the use of knowledge and in so doing, have generated a massive body of research investigating the influence of social factors on the acquisition, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge (Paisley, 1993). Simultaneously, cognitive psychologists have produced several theories suggesting the structure and mechanisms of the cognitive processes underlying the acquisition, creation and use of knowledge (see Eysenck & Keane, 2000 for a review). To investigate individual knowledge acquisition at the micro level, this study will draw on contributions from the field of cognitive science while also considering social factors that might affect the degree to which knowledge is acquired (Anderson, 1988, 1996; Forgas, 2000; Forgas & George, in press; KnorrCetina, 1981; Knorr-Cetina, 1980; Pascual-Leone, 1997; Rumelhart, 1989; Rumelhart, Smolensky, McClelland, & Hinton, 1986; Schwarz, 2000; Weiss, 1980). 1.3.2 Group Knowledge Acquisition Recent contributions to group learning (Argote, 1999; Argote, Gruenfeld, & Naquin, 2001; Harinck, De Dreu, & Van Vianen, 2000; McElroy, 2000; Rowley, 2000b; Thagard, Eliasmith, Rusnock, & Shelley, in press; Thompson, Levine, & Messick, 1999) have looked to group composition, group size, familiarity among group members, and communication processes in an attempt to understand the ways in which groups acquire knowledge. Groups demonstrate learning when knowledge that no member possessed prior to group discussion emerges through interaction and


7

discussion among group members (Argote, 1999). For the purpose of this thesis, groups are defined as a collection of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, who see themselves and are seen by others as an intact social entity that may form either naturally or through assignment, and who are embedded in a larger social system (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996). Accordingly, this definition represents those who would be involved in a collaborative Visioning project and the subsequent formulation of policy. 1.3.3 Organisational and Inter-organisational Knowledge Acquisition Decision making in organisations is often viewed as a coherent and rational process in which alternative choices and outcomes are considered in an orderly manner until the optimal alternative is selected (Argyris & Schon, 1974, 1996; Cohen & Olsen, 1976; March, 1988b); yet real decision processes in organisations infrequently fit this depiction (Fulop, Linstead, & Frith, 1999; Hubbard & Ottoson, 1997; Janis, 1982; Levine & Thompson, 1996; Lindblom, 1979; March, 1997; March & Levinthal, 1999; Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka, Toyama, & Nagata, 2000). Research shows that decision making in organisations results from the interdependent influences of organisational processes (Fulop et al., 1999; March, 1999; March, 1988b; Pfeffer, 1981; Schaef & Fassel, 1988; Shapira, 1997; Turner, 2001), individual limitations (Baum & Ingram, 1998; Calvin, 1997; Kleket, Mackay, Barr, & Jones, 2001; Kolb, 1984; Mohammed & Ringseis, 2001; Nonaka, 1991; Paulus & Huei, 2000; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993; Roch, Lane, Samuelson, Allison, & Dent, 2000) and the control opportunity and control problems that arise through organisational structure (Allison, 1971; Frohock, 1979; Fulop et al., 1999; Hayes, 1992; Kattenburg, 1980; Lindblom, 1959, 1979; March, 1988a, 1988b; Simon, 1957; Weissinger-Baylon, 1988). These frameworks provide accounts of how decisions


8

are made by individuals or groups within an organisation, but not of how organisations learn. Senge (1994) describes a learning organisation as one that is “able to deal with the problems and opportunities of today, and invest in its capacity to embrace tomorrow, because its members are continually focused on enhancing and expanding their collective awareness and capabilities” (p.

4). Organisational learning is

reflected the development of new conceptions and attitudes, the re-labelling of existing classifications, and the amendment of standards of judgement (Vecchi, Hearn & Southey, 1996).

While this may account for learning within and

organisation, it fails to acknowledge the inter-organisational learning that might occur through collaborations within a triple helix. Others have pointed out that organisations learn through knowledge networks (Etzkowitz et al., 1998; Johnston, 1999; Liebowitz, 1999; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Palmer & Richards, 1999; Seufert, von Krogh, & Bach, 1999; Skyrme, 1999). The concept of knowledge networks is most useful for describing the complexities of a collaborative research setting where there exists the potential for inter-organisational learning to occur. The concept of knowledge networks is based on a theoretical perspective whereby networks are defined as social relationships among individuals, groups, collectives of organisations, communities or even societies. From this perspective, organisational focus moves from the consideration and protection of boundaries to the management of (and care for) relationships. Therefore, organisations that enter into collaborations contain static (rules, norms and procedures) and dynamic (social relationships) elements that mutually influence the degree to which organisations learn (Delahaye, 2001; Nonaka et al., 2000; Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994; Seufert et al., 1999).


9

The elements described thus far constitute the context and areas of focus in this study.

The multi-level, multi-disciplinary approach as undertaken in this

investigation of a collaborative research project, has not previously been undertaken. The following section of this chapter details the rationale underlying this study. 1.4 Rationale There are several justifications for this research. First, there have been major changes in society and the nature of the problems it faces which, in turn, it looks to science and technology to address. Much larger and more powerful science and technology, with a growing set of new tools, is now asked by society to resolve complexly interrelated sets of problems (stemming in part from previous scientific triumphs) with an increased sense of urgency (Nelson, 1979). From the standpoint of society as a system, it appears that the role of science is shifting from a predominantly production function (i.e., the role of science in economic growth) to an adaptive function that is increasingly essential to long-term survival (Katz, 1975). Second, there is a moral obligation for governments to ensure that the direction their policies give to the institution of science do not adversely affect the community.

While society in general still feels that advances in science and

technology provide opportunities to improve the lot of humanity, it questions the social benefits of unbridled scientific and technological change (Love & Hundloe, 1992). The threats of nuclear contamination, global pollution and unemployment are but three examples of the unwanted and unanticipated effects of science about which the community is now concerned. To gain the maximum benefits from scientific and technological change, and avoid the unwanted environmental and social consequences, there has been a growing community demand for the developments in science to be more closely monitored through government (Tisdell, 1981).


10

Accordingly, the participation rate of government in collaborative arrangements of knowledge production has increased in recent years. As one of the world’s largest industries, by 1998 tourism accounted for approximately one in every ten jobs and almost 6% of world-wide economic activity (OECD, 2000; Weaver & Oppermann, 2000). In 2000-01 the Australian tourism industry directly accounted for 4.7% of expenditure in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (DITR, 2002) and was directly responsible for the employment of 551,000 people, representing 6% of all those employed (Bureau of Tourism Research, 2002). In the same period, consumption of goods and services by international visitors represented 11.2% of total export earnings (Bureau of Tourism Research, 2002). This percentage was higher than exports of coal and iron, steel and non-ferrous metals (DITR, 2002), highlighting the importance of tourism to Australia’s national economy. Tourist activity is supported by a diffuse array of predominantly small to medium size enterprises (SMEs)1 (Weaver & Oppermann, 2000). The Australian tourism industry comprises over 100,000 enterprises, of which over 85% are small businesses (Moore, 2001). Elements of the tourist industry such as travel agents, transportation, tour operators, and accommodation contribute directly to a region’s economy. Other components, namely food and beverage and retail sectors, have significant, but looser associations to the economic contribution of tourism. In spite of its importance to a region’s economy, the tourism industry lacks a solid research base to underpin strategic planning and management of a destination. Therefore, any investigation that aims to understand the dynamic elements of this diffuse and

1

Small enterprises are defined as having less than twenty employees. Medium-size enterprises are characterised as having greater than twenty, but less than on hundred employees (Wood, et al., 2001).


11

complex industry as it endeavours to develop a research base would make a positive contribution to the eventual utility of research findings, particularly regarding destination planning and management. Finally, the establishment of linkages among industry, government, and science are paramount to the realisation of an economy that emphasises the role of knowledge and technology in driving productivity and economic growth (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000; Etzkowitz et al., 2000; Etzkowitz et al., 1998; Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996).

One response (and perhaps the most

prominent) by Australia to this global trend in developing tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production has been through the establishment of the CRC Program. The underlying expectation is that research generated through this the CRC Program will have direct and immediate applicability, and will be used for decision making (CRCST, 2002a; DEST, 2002; DISR, 2000; OECD, 1996; Weiss, 1980; Weiss, 1995). While this is the expectation, the literature shows that research designed for organisational application is infrequently utilised in such a direct fashion (Hubbard & Ottoson, 1997; Knorr-Cetina, 1981; Shove & Simmons, 1997; Weiss, 1980; Weiss, 1978). Furthermore, early research into Australian university-industry collaborations (including some CRC projects) (Mann, Chatfield, Bain, & Pirola-Merlo, 1996) showed that many of these collaborative ventures failed to fulfil the expectations of participants, leading to some major disappointments in venture outcomes. Therefore, research that endeavours to identify the factors that more or less influence the utilisation of knowledge promises to identify ‘best practices’ that subsequently may increase the pecuniary return on research investment. Although the concept of a Triple Helix system (Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996) acknowledges the dynamics of this evolving knowledge-based economy,

no


12

comprehensive theoretical model has been published that describes knowledge acquisition in collaborative settings across individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels. This study proposes to examine the CRC process, specifically the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) Gold Coast Visioning Project — from research conceptualisation through to eventual utilisation of CRC output, covering a time span from 1999 to 2002. To some degree, the collaborative research setting under investigation could be described as action research. While there are many definitions of action research, in its simplest form is understood as research that is intended to inform actions in the world (Bogden & Biklen, 1992; Dick & Dalmau, 1999; Lewin, 1946; McTaggart, 1991; Schön, 1983). The questions that would direct such research are derived, to some degree, by the needs for action, just as the interpretations of that research are driven, in some sense, by the same need for action. In a broad sense this is true of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, however, the collaborative nature of the project mans that it may hold elements in common with some forms of action research, but not all.

This is

discussed in greater detail in the following chapter. The Gold Coast Visioning Project provides an ideal environment in which to investigate the CRC process. This is due to the magnitude of the project in terms of a0 the amount of research that was undertaken, and b) the specific intent for the subsequent research findings to inform policies that would guide the strategic planning and management of the region. This investigative approach to the CRC process requires a breakdown of the sequence of the stages of knowledge creation, knowledge diffusion and the eventual utilisation of knowledge, from its cognitive underpinnings to eventual decision


13

making. These issues are addressed through multilevel, multidisciplinary enquiry. The acquisition and utilisation of knowledge emerging through collaborative research is investigated at individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels, drawing on existing theories from the fields of sociology, policy studies, and cognitive, social and organisational psychology.

By drawing on the extensive

literature available in these fields, it is possible to develop an understanding of what is occurring at each level of knowledge acquisition. This study aims to identify common elements in order to understand how these elements operate, not only within each level, but also among them. By drawing on the extant literature, a series of models was developed to provide a framework through which to explore cognitive, social and affective influences in the acquisition and eventual utilisation of knowledge in collaborative research settings. These models recognise the interrelatedness of social, cognitive and affective (i.e., emotive/emotional) influences (not elsewhere apparent in the literature), and thereby, provide a comprehensive platform from which to analyse the data collected in the current study. These models not only inform the analysis, they are also informed by this investigation, thereby providing the foundations from which to begin to develop an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project. As collaborative Visioning arrangements are an emergent form of scientific knowledge production with which to underpin destination management, there is little in the literature to inform this investigation. Contributions to the understanding of this process have been through evaluative outcomes based research conducted in hindsight (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Helling, 1998). In these studies, data was obtained retrospectively through either stakeholder interviews (Bramwell &


14

Sharman, 1999) or surveys (Helling, 1998). A difficulty with retrospective research is that it is open to the possibility that respondents will reinterpret the past in light of the present (Babbie; 1992; de Vaus, 1995).

A longitudinal ethnographic

investigation describing the ways in which knowledge emerging through collaborative research undertakings is acquired and utilised is not yet present in the literature. Additionally, much of the research investigating the processes by which knowledge is acquired by individuals or groups has been carried out in experimental conditions, which may not reflect the dynamics of these processes in situ. Therefore, the Gold Coast Visioning Project provides the ideal context in which to develop an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project as they evolve over time, and to identify ways in which the CRC research process can most efficiently blend research with practice. 1.5 Philosophical Underpinnings The ontological assumptions underpinning the present study are social constructionist. That is, that social life is based around rules, that social realities are socially constructed and/or that that social actions have meanings, and perhaps outcomes, which need to be interpreted (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Chalip, 1998; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; A. L. Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1994). Social constructionism is generally understood to challenge positivist models (Mulkay, 1991), which presuppose an objective reality (Butterfield, 1957). Positivist models state that the testability of a scientific theory must consist in the theory being open to verification or falsification by means of a specifiable set of empirical procedures, and by reference to some specifiable set of observable facts (Popper, 1972). However, as will be seen in the following chapter, the actual history of science suggests that such requirements of testability are not always acceptable. This is particularly evident in


15

the case of theories, which are both in early stages of articulation, and are of very broad scope aiming to explain a wide range of different phenomena (Mepham, 1973). Although both these characteristics are present in this thesis, this thesis retains the positivist view in so much that empirically driven understandings of social phenomena can be used to design or transform social situations and/or conditions. This is discussed in more detail in the final chapter of this thesis. At this point it is sufficient to say that the perspective taken in this study presupposes that some processes, although socially constructed, are better than others, and that some outcomes are better than others.

Furthermore, this study presupposes that by

identifying factors that will facilitate or inhibit effective processes and outcomes, it is possible to alter social situations or conditions in a positive fashion. Not only can the subject under investigation be described as a form of action research, but this current investigation also contains some elements that may be held in common with action research. What makes this investigation different to action research in its broad reference is that this investigation focuses on a particular form of action research that is collaborative, not just participative. That is, that this form of action research is collaborative in terms of a triple-helix assemblage, which does not describe all action research. Additionally, this current investigation differs from the traditional definition of action research as it is a multi-faceted study, in so much that it is attempting to draw together a number of different dimensions in order to understand the dynamics occurring in a tri-lateral arrangement of scientific knowledge production. While there are varying definitions of action research, and it could be argued that action research is an all encompassing phrase used to describe many forms of research, this investigation is interested in a particular facet of action research in


16

terms of form and direction — form being the cooperative research setting, and direction being the triple helix approach to the production and management of science. 1.6 Thesis Outline The remaining chapters of this thesis present in greater detail the rationale, method, and results of this study. In order to establish a definition of knowledge to be used throughout this thesis, definitions and classifications of knowledge at individual, group organisational and inter-organisational levels are presented in Chapter Three. Chapters Four, Five and Six review the existing literature relating to knowledge acquisition and utilisation at individual, group and organisational and inter-organisational levels, respectively. A synthesis of the literature is presented in Chapter Seven and a series of models to inform the analysis of this investigation are put forth. Chapter Eight presents the philosophical underpinnings and practical applications of the methodology used to gather and analyse information gleaned throughout this research project. A detailed description of the Gold Coast and its tourism industry is also given so that the reader can develop a full appreciation of the context in which the current investigation took place. As with the literature review, the results are presented in a multilevel format. Chapter Nine details the objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project and the ways in which the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) proposed to achieve those objectives. An analysis of the methodologies chosen by CRCST leadership considers the bases upon which particular methodologies were chosen.

Chapter Ten compares these espoused plans and objectives with what

actually occurred, and discusses the impact this had on the ways that meetings and workshops were held. Additionally, this chapter explores the inter-organisational


17

learning that took place and the factors that more ore less impacted upon this. Chapters Eleven and Twelve consider these same issues at a group and individual level, respectively. Drawing on the models presented in Chapter Seven, a synthesis of the results is offered in Chapter Thirteen. In conclusion, the theoretical and practical implications of the research findings are discussed in Chapter Fourteen. In order to provide a context for this investigation, this thesis commences with a description of current Australian science policy, how it has evolved over the last twenty-five years, and the subsequent formation of the CRC Program.


18

CHAPTER TWO The Cooperative Research Centres Program

The purpose of this chapter is to describe how Australia’s science policy has evolved over the last twenty-five years.

This is approached in unison with

simultaneous changes that have occurred in the institution of science itself, the nature of the relationship between science and society, and the emergent role of science in economic growth. The specific history of the CRC Program and development of the science policies underpinning it is discussed.

This provides a contextual

understanding of how collaborative research projects within the CRC Program work, and does so in a manner that allows general lessons to be drawn from the findings of this study. Post World War II thinking in Western nations saw science as an institution that was (in principle) removed from the control or influence of pecuniary or other external interests.

Thus, new knowledge generated by such research would

ultimately be transformed through research applied to a specific problem or need, which would in turn produce innovations through which economic growth and other societal benefits would eventuate (Bush, 1945).

In 1970, Kuhn challenged the

concept that pure science was segregated from societal influences and provided the impetus for critical sociological studies of science.

Australian policymakers

subsequently mined this nascent field of study and the results of this work, in conjunction

with

OECD

(Organisation

for

Economic

Co-operation

and

Development) pressure, formed the foundation of the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program. While other governments have instigated policies to encourage linkages between science and industry (Anderson, 1999; Bekhradnia, 1999; Benner


19

& Sandstrom, 2000; Committee on Science - U.S. House of Representatives, 1999; House Committee on Science, 1998; Industry Canada, 1997; Lyons, 1976; OECD, 1994; Walker, 1997) , the Australian CRC is unique in its ultimate ideals, structures and processes (Slatyer, 1993). Therefore, an understanding of the socio-historical background to the CRC Program is necessary to understand the CRC Program itself. In light of this, this chapter looks at the relationship between science and society and the form of scientific investigation that is emerging as a consequence of this relationship. The underlying philosophies and objectives of the CRC Program are presented and the project that is used as a case study to investigate the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and eventual utilisation, namely the Gold Coast Visioning Project, is introduced. The purpose of this investigation is to provide valuable insight into what factors influence the creation and utilisation of knowledge in this burgeoning form of scientific investigation, which to this point, remains largely enigmatic. 2.1 Background The challenge for policymakers in the late 1980s was (and remains today) to enhance the effectiveness of the overall Australian research and development effort in order to keep pace with the rapid scientific and technological advances that were occurring internationally (ASTEC, 1989; DIST, 1995).

Australia’s economic

performance over the last 20 years has not been strong and Australia now rates as one of the largest commercial debtor nations (Dusevic, 1998). It has been suggested that the key factors which have occasioned Australia’s weak economic performance are a lack of innovation and international competitiveness. These have resulted from comparatively inefficient industry and inward looking management styles (Vecchio, Hearn, & Southey, 1996). In the context of increasing globalisation, there is pressure


on Australia to improve its competitiveness.

20

Government policy over the past

decade, in line with OECD advancements, has looked to science, technology and innovation as one base for competitive expansion. Although knowledge generation is well established as an important factor in economic growth, economists are now exploring ways to incorporate knowledge and technology transfers more directly in their theories and models. ‘New growth theory’ (Grossman & Helpman, 1994; Romer, 1994) reflects the attempt to understand the role of knowledge and technology in driving productivity and economic growth. In this view, investments in research, development, education and training are key. In addition to knowledge investments, knowledge distribution through formal and informal networks is essential to economic performance. Employment in the knowledge-based economy is characterised by increasing demand for more highly skilled workers

(Dunphy & Griffiths, 1998).

Changes in technology, and

particularly the advent of information technologies, are making educated and skilled labour more valuable and unskilled labour less so (OECD, 1996). As a result of these changes, government policies will require more emphasis on upgrading human capital through promoting access to a range of skills, especially the capacity to learn new skills (Gibson, 1997). Accordingly, the knowledge distribution power of the economy will need to be enhanced through collaborative networks and the diffusion of technology. If the benefits of technology in relation to productivity are to be maximised, conditions to facilitate change at an organisational level will need to be instated. The institution of science, especially public research laboratories and institutes of higher education, carries out conduit functions in the knowledge-based economy, including knowledge production, transmission and transfer. However, the


21

science system is facing the challenge of reconciling its traditional functions of knowledge production with its newer role of collaborating with industry in the transfer of knowledge and technology

(Johnston & Blumentritt, 1998).

The

challenge for governments today lies in their ability not only to promote and facilitate the production of knowledge, but also to initiate processes that will enhance the ongoing relationship between science and society. This requires collaborative agenda setting arrangements. 2.2 The Relationship between Science and Society. The past several decades have seen marked changes in the role of science and technology in national affairs. First, there have been changes in the nature of science itself (Edel, 1972). It has come to be seen as the prominent mode of knowledge creation and has become intellectually more ‘human’ than previously (Nelson, 1979). This is because of its surrender of both reductionism and belief in total explanation. Accordingly, the development of a ‘gestaltist’ form of integrative analytical process is more able to cope with the reality of wholeness, as well as that of components or elements (Trist, 1970). Second, there have been significant changes in the scope, size and cost of science.

With the increase of highly capitalised science, public concern has

increased over the accountability of science and its returns on investment (Kaplan, 1991; Tisdell, 1981). Third, there have been major changes in society and the nature of the problems it faces which, in turn, it wants science and technology to address (Nelkin, 1979, 1995).

Much larger and more powerful science and technology, with a

growing set of new tools, is now asked by society to resolve complexly interrelated sets of problems (stemming in part from science and technology’s previous triumphs)


22

(Cozzens & Woodhouse, 1995; Nelson, 1979). Taking the view of society as a system, it appears that the primary role of science is shifting from a predominantly production function (i.e., the role of science in economic growth) to an adaptive function that is increasingly elemental to long term survival (Katz, 1975), and through which economic growth might then arise. This trend is indicated by the change in the major science and technology areas of the 1950s to mid-1960s (military and space) as compared with areas of more recent concern (health, energy and environment) (Cozzens & Woodhouse, 1995; Love & Hundloe, 1992). Finally, science has become deeply enmeshed in government policymaking and vice versa (Cozzens & Woodhouse, 1995).

This can be attributed to the

increasing interdependence between the two sectors: science requiring a growing share of its resources from government, and government needing (or needing to stimulate the development and use of) the knowledge and skills of scientists (LaFollette, 1998; Lyons, 1976). 2.3 Government Priorities in Science Policy Government management or control of science and technology has increased over the past few decades as governments have become more concerned about their formulation of science and technology policy. The reasons for increased government involvement are complex, and while some factors have been discussed, others are worthy of mention. While the general community still regards advances in science and technology as a means to improve the lot of humanity, it questions the social benefits of unbridled scientific and technological change. Nuclear risk, global pollution and unemployment are but three examples of the unwanted and unanticipated effects of science that have been brought to the conscious awareness of the community, and


23

which now provide constant cause for concern (Love & Hundloe, 1992). To gain the maximum benefits from scientific and technological change, and avoid the unwanted environmental and social consequences, there has been a growing community demand for the developments in science to be more closely monitored by the government to meet social goals (Cozzens & Woodhouse, 1995; Kaplan, 1991; Tisdell, 1981). The belief has gained ground that the direction of scientific effort should not be left to scientists or even business managers acting alone, but that government reflecting community-wide interests should increase its participation in directing scientific advancements (Elmore, 1979; Slatyer, 1992c). Specific concerns such as environmental damage, recognition of the need for sustainable development and better management of non-renewable resources, and increased economic competition accompanied by economic recession, have resulted in demands for improvements in the science policies of governments (Dusevic, 1998; Stocker, 1997). In view of the environmental issues that have come about, in large part from the previous triumphs of science, emerging scientific discovery and technological innovation are also taking place within the context of development that is sustainable. 2.4 Sustainable Development as a Priority The concept of ‘sustainable development’ emerged in the 1990s as the guiding theme of development issues. As a specific notion, sustainable development first appeared in the late 1970s and early 1980s at which time it was propelled into the public arena as an attractive, if intangible, organisational archetype that was subsequently enlarged to encompass a spectrum of broad thematic areas (Weaver & Lawton, 1998). The concept was formulated in a much more rigorous fashion with


24

the Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987), which defined sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (p. 47). The subsequent embrace of sustainable development has seen the concept evolve from being ‘fashionable’ into full-scale institutionalisation, evident in the fact that there are few policies today that do not recognise and claim adherence to sustainable development principles (Frazier, 1997; Love & Hundloe, 1992). As with the advent of any conceptual shift, varied interpretations and divergent schools of thought on the practicalities of implementing sustainable development have emerged (Burr, 1995). Despite the attractiveness and subsequent common consent on the broad definition of sustainable development, it is not surprising that opposing opinions exist since the semantics of the term itself are contradictory (Weaver & Lawton, 1998). The term ‘sustainable’ implies the steady state dynamics and limitations favoured by the environmental movement; the expression ‘development’ is a derivative from the vocabulary of the pro-growth lobby and ‘technological utopians’ (i.e. the belief that technology can solve all problems).

There are those who, perhaps ideologically, embrace the simplistic

definition of sustainable development and, rightly or wrongly, accept through the association of terms, that environmental integrity and economic growth can be achieved simultaneously (Harris & Leiper, 1995). For others, however, the conflict cannot be resolved and sustainable development is dismissed as a contradiction of terms that realistically, is unattainable (McKercher, 1993; Willers, 1995).

This

argument suggests that disciples of sustainable development are either extremely naïve, or alternatively, have engaged the concept to reinforce existing agendas, with


25

environmentalists stressing the ‘sustainable’ element and the pro-growth lobby emphasising ‘development’ (McKercher, 1993). Given the ambiguity of sustainable development, it is appropriate to question the legitimacy of this concept as the underlying basis for the radical amendment of various economic sectors and government policy in the past decade. Hunter (1997) suggests the argument can be resolved by repositioning one’s interpretation of sustainable development.

Rather than viewing sustainable development as

dichotomous, with opposing positions, it should be viewed as a continuum, with the positions least open to compromise at both ends and the number of adherents distributed approximately as a bell curve (see Figure 2.1). This ideological continuum is roughly apportioned into anthropocentric (emphasis on human viability) and biocentric (focus on ecological viability) sectors. As with any bell curve, extremists represent a minority, yet their level of commitment and effective lobbying often exaggerates their influence. Closer to the

Figure 2.1. An ideological continuum of sustainable development perspectives (Weaver and Lawton, 1998).


26

centre, however, are positions more open to compromise and synthesis (Hunter, 1997). Even if this conception of sustainable development were to be adopted, there still remains the issue of its implementation. Political realities, community demand, and economic factors are complexities that often affect departure from the ideal and occasion the contexts in which science and technology increasingly finds itself working within.

This has been described as a radical, irreversible, world-wide

transformation in the way science is organised and performed (Ziman, 1994). However, this ‘radical transformation’ may not be a metamorphosis of science as much as an acknowledgement of influences that, until recently, were not a part of popular discourse. 2.5 The Evolution of Science A turning point in the analysis of this recent evolution of science was provided by the work of Kuhn (1970). His classic text, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, identified the dynamic and transient nature of dominant scientific paradigms, providing an impetus for critical sociological studies of science. Kuhn explained how at any one time science operates under the sway of dominant paradigms, which, after a period of internal convulsions that he termed ‘scientific revolutions’, are replaced by others. His work showed how science is influenced by broader social and psychological factors in addition to external environmental ones (Kuhn, 1970).

Prior to this, the social and philosophical study of science had

admitted no role for social influences in scientific knowledge. This view is still widely held by many practicing scientists and those institutionally dependent on science (Healy, 1997). However, Kuhn’s insights provided the stimulus that resulted in efforts to establish the socially negotiated character of knowledge, thereby promoting new developments in the sociological study of scientific knowledge.


27

Gibbons et al. (1994) sought to quantify the changes occurring in science, characterising two modes of science. According to their analyses, Mode 1 (the traditional academic mode of knowledge production) is organised on disciplinary lines, and is characterised by homogeneity, and hierarchy. In practice, this has frequently been interpreted as knowledge production carried out in the absence of a particular goal (i.e., basic or ‘curiosity-oriented’ research) with quality control maintained essentially through peer review. In contrast, Mode 2 is characterised by the fact that it is carried out in the context of application (i.e., the knowledge is created because it is useful to someone). It is transdisciplinary, heterogeneous, heterarchical and achieves quality control through social accountability and reflexivity.

Consequently, this diffuse and transient method of knowledge

production leads to results that are also highly contextualised (Gibbons et al., 1994). Whilst this dichotomy is of use heuristically to define ‘basic’ and ‘applied’ research, the two kinds of research are rarely so distinct from one another (Johnston & Blumentritt, 1998). 2.6 The Symbiotic Nature of Knowledge Production It has been argued that the persistence of the applied/basic dichotomy can be attributed to its fundamentally social function, insomuch as the distinction segregates researchers into prestige hierarchies (Chalip, 1985). Researchers who can proclaim their work to be ‘basic’ acquire notably more prestige than do those whose work is classified as ‘applied’. The lesser prestige accorded to applied research is both a contributor to, and a result of, the concurrent patterns of information exchange and peer recognition that creates a self-reinforcing hierarchy. The so-called Mode 2 of knowledge production is not new. It was the format of science before the establishment of norms emphasising disciplinary knowledge


28

and the importance of collegial recognition, which occurred late in the 19th century (Benner & Sandstrom, 2000). How is it, then, that Mode 1 became a dominant form of science after Mode 2? In the late 19th century, science sought to establish its place in society as an institution characterised by the qualities of integrity and virtue. Since Mode 1 is a construct founded upon the scientist as an isolated individual, separated from the interests of society, it was instigated to substantiate science as an autonomous body, particularly at a time when it was still a fragile institution. Hence, the consequent ideology of pure research was, in principle, removed from the control or influence of pecuniary or other external interests (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). This philosophy of ‘pure’ science evolved to the point that elaboration of theory became the absolute goal of research. Melioration of theory is considered more ‘basic’ than problem solving, as it is thought that problem solving requires good theory whereas theories need not improve as a result of research that aims to solve pragmatic problems. Since ‘basic’ research is assumed to be devoid of external influence it is clear why theory may inform problem solving, but not the reverse (Chalip, 1985). The process of applying knowledge in order to resolve practical concerns has often been considered analogous to engineering (i.e., the science of applying knowledge of the properties of natural matter and the natural sources of energy to solve the practical problems of industry). Subsequently, the engineering model is frequently used to describe the process (see Figure 2.2). This analogy has its roots in the tradition of pure science. It is, then, apparent why basic research is considered to serve as the foundation and catalyst to much applied research, and is thought to be a fundamental driver of innovation leading to the development of new products and/or services (DETYA, 1999; DIST, 1995).


Problem definition

Identification of missing knowledge

Acquisition of research data

Interpretation for problem solution

29

Utilisation of knowledge to solve problem

Figure 2.2 Traditional linear model of applied research.

The policy framework that has guided many governments’ support of research and development over the past 50 years was developed by Vannevar Bush (1945) in his report, Science – The Endless Frontier. The Bush report set forth models describing basic and applied research, and the connection between basic research and technological innovation (Bush, 1945). Bush’s first model classified research along a one-dimensional linear spectrum defined by the motivation of the researcher. Essentially, the research process has two motives: one is to understand the natural world, the other is to control it (Snow, 1959). At one end of the scale, curiosity driven research (i.e., basic research) is motivated by the desire to seek new understanding and knowledge about nature. At the other end is use-driven research (i.e., applied research) motivated by the desire to use that knowledge in a practical way. The more one is concerned about application or use of the research, the further one is thought to move from basic research to applied research. Bush’s second model suggested that the new knowledge generated by basic research would ultimately be transformed through applied research and development in a linear, sequential manner. In turn, this would produce technological innovations through which economic growth and other societal benefits would eventuate. Through the institutionalisation of this distinction and its associated norms and procedures, the university sector has emerged as a distinct social institution. In contrast to this


30

position, historical evidence shows that science has always been organised through networks, to pursue practical as well as theoretical interests (Chalip, 1985; Stokes, 1997). Evidence of the enduring interrelated relationship between basic and applied research can be seen merely by noting the corroborative examples of the past that have produced some of the most meritorious and useful advances in science (Chalip, 1985; Merton, 1942). Of interest is that as early as 1942, Merton reported that between 40% and 60% of discoveries in the 17th century could be classified as having their origins in trying to solve problems relevant to society’s needs. Stokes (1997) cited the work of Pasteur to illustrate this point and presented a matrix of utility and fundamentality in science (see Figure 2.3.) The upper right quadrant was called Pasteur’s Quadrant since Pasteur’s work was reflective of research that was goal-oriented but pursued in a basic research style. This is in direct contrast to the propositions of Gibbons et al. (1994) that suggest the contextual approach to applied

Research is inspired by: Considerations of use? No Yes Quest for fundamental understanding? No

Pure basic research (Bohr)

Yes Use-inspired basic research (Pasteur) Pure applied research (Edison)

Figure 2.3. Quadrant model of scientific research ( Stokes, 1997).


31

research is an event of recent times. Whereas open and transdisciplinary disputation among scholars was what once defined science, through institutionalisation it is now marked by ever-increasing specialisation of disciplines and disengagement among them (Snow, 1959). Fundamentally, the amalgamation between applied and basic research exists because practical concerns provide a focus for innovative thought. Additionally, applied settings will always be particularly receptive to innovative work because the visibility of practical consequences is higher there than elsewhere (Chalip, 1985). This brief historical analysis shows that the current institution of science has emerged through a value-bestowing area of belief, which has in turn, created a culture through which rules and procedures have developed. The gulf that exists between the scientist and the non-scientist is referred to as the ‘two cultures’ metaphor (Snow, 1959). Snow (1959) states that this divide is much worse than “a pity, as at the heart of thought and creation some of the best chances go by default. The clashing point between two subjects, two disciplines or two cultures facilitates potential for creative chances” (p. 16). It is suggested that the two cultures are now so crystallised and rigid in their social forms that science has denied itself the free flow of stimuli for innovative and creative thought upon which it once thrived. This cultural divide has often been acknowledged as an impediment to knowledge creation (DETYA, 1999; DIST, 1995, 1998; Leydesdorff, 2000; OECD, 1994; PMSEIC, 1998). The establishment of linkages between industry and science are considered paramount to the realisation of an economy that emphasises the role of knowledge and technology in driving productivity and economic growth.

The

concept of a Triple Helix system (Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996) has recently been put forth in an attempt to better recognise and acknowledge


32

the dynamics of this evolving knowledge-based economy. 2.7 Tri-lateral Arrangements of Knowledge Production The Triple Helix thesis (Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996) concentrates on the network overlay of communications that reshape the institutional arrangements among researchers, industries and governments.

The interests of

industry and government merge with and alter the performance and organisation of university research, challenging the collegial role of research. In connection with this, Leydesdorff et al. (1996) claim that a new organisational field, broader than the traditional organisational field, has emerged namely, the knowledge-based economy, consisting of industry, government and science (or research). This model describes how a new knowledge infrastructure is generated in terms of overlapping

Government &/or Government Agencies

Industry

Research

Figure 2.4. The triple-helix model indicating the overlapping institutional spheres of industry, government and academic research groups (Etkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1996).


33

institutional spheres, with hybrid organisations emerging at the interfaces (see Figure 2.4). In contrast to a double helix, or co-evolution between two dynamics, a Triple Helix is not expected to be stable (Leydesdorff, 2000). Drawing on established notions of organisational/social psychology, dyadic relationships may be governed by ongoing negotiations and established conditions of power (Erwee, 2000). Conversely, the reason tri-partite relations are not expected to be stable is because there is always the possibility of a rapid change in the configuration of relations (via power) since coalitions may change as interests realign – a fundamental tenet of Game Theory (Brandenburger & Nalebuff, 1996). In Game Theory, nothing is fixed. The environment is dynamic and evolving. Players take on multiple roles and innovate as they find new ways of interacting with each other. Similarly, individuals and groups who make conscious decisions and the advent of unintended consequences are what drive triple helix relations (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000; Lenski & Lenski, 1987). In a triple helix system, where each sector may relate to the other two, it is expected that through the overlay of communications, networks and hybrid organisations among the helices will emerge. The sources of innovation in a Triple Helix configuration are no longer synchronised a priori, nor do they fit together in a predetermined order. Rather, they generate puzzles for participants, analysts and policymakers (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). The aggregated relationships within the triple helix spawns interactive offshoots of intentions, strategies and projects that, in turn, create added value by constantly reorganising and synthesising the institutional infrastructures in order to achieve at the least, outcomes adjacent to the goals set by the collaborating parties (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). These interactive offshoots are further


34

transformed through discussions and negotiations within the triple helix. As today’s organisations are in a constant state of flux, it is therefore implied that the hybrid organisations and networks that arise from within a triple helix will themselves be in a state of endless transition. The complex dynamics that impinge upon the direction and course of each sector are the same factors that will determine the different levels and perspectives from which innovation can be defined. These dynamics embody social and psychological factors such as market forces, political power, institutional control and social movements which, until recently had not been recognised as influences in scientific knowledge (Healy, 1997). In one form or another, most countries and regions are trying to attain some form of Triple Helix in order to drive productivity and economic growth (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). The common aim among them is to achieve an innovative environment consisting of tri-lateral initiatives for knowledge-based economic development, and strategic alliances among industry, government and academic research groups. These co-operative arrangements are often encouraged (but not necessarily controlled) by government — either through new policy or funding, whether directly or indirectly. In spite of broad acknowledgement of the complex dynamics found within these collaborative tri-lateral arrangements, there remains the expectation that research will produce knowledge that is of immediate use to industry, which in turn will promote economies. The underlying assumption is that research generated in this sequential order will have direct and immediate applicability and will be used for problem solving (DIST, 1995; Slatyer, 1990, 1993; Stocker, 1997). Australia’s response to this global trend in developing tri-lateral arrangements has been through the establishment of the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program.


35

The CRC Program was a practical expression of this new form of scientific enquiry and, given the socio-historical background, its evolution can be seen as a naturally occurring phenomenon if Australia was to embrace the scientific and technological changes occurring internationally.

For the first time, Australian

scientists recognised the economic and social opportunities that might arise through this symbiotic form of investigation. While the CRC Program is acknowledged as an effective means of developing innovation in order to stimulate economic growth (DIST, 1995, 1998), Australia was slower than many other countries to initiate such a program2. This was in spite of the fact that there were circumstances unique to Australia that should have created a greater sense of urgency in establishing such cooperative settings. The following section recounts these distinctive conditions and goes on to describe the political events that occasioned implementation of the CRC program. 2.8 The Cooperative Research Centres Program In addition to the global issues mentioned earlier, there were other conditions, some unique to Australia, which underlay the subsequent formation of the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program.

First, Australia’s combined

scientific and technological resources, whilst quite substantial, were dispersed both geographically and institutionally (Slatyer, 1990). This dispersion made it difficult to establish concentrated and coordinated research facilities, which are required to keep pace with the rapid scientific and technological changes occurring internationally. A further by-product of this disjointed activity was the duplication of facilities (Stocker, 1997). Additionally, a traditional ‘top-down’ flow of funding

2

For a comprehensive review of government science policy and collaborative research arrangements in Western nations other than Australia, see Beesley, 2003.


36

from institutional sources also prevented large integrated research teams from being developed (Slatyer, 1990). Furthermore, there was little involvement by scientists and researchers outside of universities in educational programs. This denied students access to the skills and experience of many of Australia’s leading researchers and subsequently, an accurate awareness of the practical issues facing industry. It also denied researchers the stimulus of interaction with students. Finally, the low levels of sophistication in many industrial sectors was reflected in their limited capacity to become involved in joint research activities (Slatyer, 1990; Turpin, 1997). Whilst these features may have been present in other countries, they were more pronounced in Australia. This was largely due to geographic dispersion, which is an issue in both global and domestic settings. 2.8.1 Australia’s Response to Domestic and Global Challenges The Liberal Party’s recognition of the need for explicit science advisory arrangements resulted in the creation of the first clearly identifiable formal Australian science policy advisory body in 1972 — the Advisory Council for Science and Technology. The subsequent Labor government, however, soon abolished this advisory body. In 1974, a further vision was established with OECD investigation of science and technology in Australia.

The report recommended institutional

arrangements that the OECD believed were appropriate to Australian circumstances, which might then achieve what was at the time, a relatively new concept of a ‘national policy’ for science and technology (OECD, 1974). Specifically the OECD reviewers suggested: (1) a Ministerial Committee, responsible to the Prime Minister, but regularly chaired by a Minister for science, who could balance, coordinate and criticise with complete impartiality the total effort; (2) an Advisory Council for


37

Scientific and Technological Policy, to assist the Ministerial Committee and consult with experts comprising a 12 – 15 person independent body to be chaired full-time; and, (3) a small high-quality Secretariat to assist the Advisory Council, made up of members seconded for limited periods, having a close working relationship with the Chair, and able to conduct studies and engage consultants without the specific authority of the Minister. The OECD investigators also suggested that a high level Interdepartmental Research Committee be formed to consider the coordination of in house programs. Increased awareness that resulted from the OECD (1974) report resulted in the emergence of science and technology industries as an economic option, and attracted some policy attention with the formation of the Australian Science and Technology Council (ASTEC) in 1975. ASTEC was reconstituted under a new Coalition government in 1977 where it was recommended that it be an independent statutory advisory council reporting to the Prime Minister. As a consequence of the Meyers Report in 1980 (Meyers, 1980), science and technology began to figure in Australian economic debate, but it was not until 1989 that new features of the system, similar to those as suggested by the OECD (1974), were introduced. At this time a major new ministerial forum was formed – the Prime Minister’s Science Council (PMSC), chaired by the Prime Minister. Along with other senior Ministers and representatives of the science, engineering and technology (SET) community, the PMSC met biannually to consider issues of national importance in science and technology. The position of Chief Scientist was created in the Prime Minister’s portfolio to advise the Prime Minister and Minister Assisting and also to function as Executive Officer of the PMSC. Further changes to the system included the Chair of ASTEC being appointed to the PMSC and the


38

establishment of a Coordinating Committee on Science and Technology, chaired by the Chief Scientist. In order to increase the contributions science might make to the Australian economy, a proposal was submitted to the Prime Minister in late 1989 outlining the concept of the Cooperative Research Centre program which, in principle, aimed to address and overcome the issues identified by the OECD (1974) and Meyers (1980) reports (ASTEC, 1989). The concepts underlying the CRC Program were therefore: •

to create a system of world-class applications-oriented research centres by

linking together outstanding research groups from the public and private sectors; •

to enable each participating group to retain its separate institutional affiliation,

but each Centre to constitute a collaborative integrated research team; •

to focus the research on challenging research fields and areas which underpin

existing or emerging industry sectors; •

to co-locate the groups participating in each Centre, wherever possible, to

promote effective cooperation and to enable expensive facilities to be used efficiently and without unnecessary duplication; •

to locate the Centres on or adjacent to University campuses wherever possible, so

as to encourage precinct development around Universities and enable the Centres to contribute as fully as possible to the strengthening of educational programs; •

to involve research users in the planning and operation of each Centre so as to

enhance the effective utilisation of the research results; and, •

to ensure that each Centre was led by a Director who would be an experienced

and highly regarded researcher with appropriate management skills (ASTEC, 1989).


39

Given the commitment to SET policy already demonstrated by the government through the changes it had initiated, it is not surprising that upon initial presentation of the proposal, the Prime Minister was immediately responsive to the need for such an important form of change. Consequently, Prime Minster Hawke requested discussions with Ministerial, academic, research and business leaders. Intensive discussions were held throughout the end of 1989 and early 1990. Intense confidentiality impeded the process initially (Ryan, 1992), but the high level of acceptance and enthusiasm toward the program by all key groups was a major factor in the ultimate acceptance of the scheme by the Prime Minister and his government in 1990 (Slatyer, 1990). The proposal went through the normal preparatory processes of cabinet approval involving discussions with other departments, which were generally favourable, and was ready for cabinet consideration when the Prime Minister Hawke called the 1990 election.

Subsequently, the proposal became caught up in the

election campaign. Hawke ultimately made the CRC Program part of the ‘clever country’ theme, and the associated science and technology policies became a pivotal component of the Labor government’s electoral platform (Ryan, 1992). While this had the advantage of increasing national awareness of science and technology issues, it also carried uncertainties, since the Coalition parties initially opposed the program. With hindsight, this potential problem was however, hypothetical, since the Labor government was returned and the proposal passed through Federal parliament. The final CRC Program objectives, as approved by cabinet, were: •

to support long-term, high-quality scientific and technological research which

contributes to national objectives, including economic and social development, the maintenance of a strong capability in basic research and the development of


40

internationally competitive industry sectors; •

to capture the benefits of research, and to strengthen the links between research

and its commercial and other applications, by the active involvement of the users of research in the work of the Centres; •

to build centres of research concentration by promoting cooperative research, and

through it a more efficient use of resources in the national research effort; •

to stimulate education and training, particularly in graduate programs, through

the active involvement of researchers from outside the higher education system in educational activities, and graduate students in major research programs (National Board of Employment Education and Training, 1996). Fundamental to the concept also was the expectation that the realisation of the Centres would demonstrate to the Australian research community the benefits of greater cooperation. This was expected to enhance the overall national research effort (DIST, 1995). One of the challenges foreseen by the Chief Scientist at the commencement of the program was that of improving the dialogue between science, government and industry (Slatyer, 1992b). This was emphasised as necessary if the CRC Program was to meet its long-term objectives of not only creating knowledge that was timely and appropriate, but also transferring that knowledge and technology in a timely and appropriate fashion to research users in order to facilitate innovation. A review of the CRC Program in 1995 acknowledged the substantial challenges the CRCs have faced in bridging the ‘cultural divide’ and developing links between researchers, industry and other research users, and concluded these challenges were being dealt with effectively (DIST, 1995). The Australian government today remains committed to the development of


41

science and technology and the establishment of priorities for SET policy. A recent report to the Minister for Science and Technology which reviewed Australian SET arrangements stated the CRC Program was “the subject of considerable commendation in submissions to the review” (Stocker, 1997, p. 48). The report added that the program, and the work of individual centres, has been instrumental in changing the culture of research, marketing the value of research in industry, and fostering research interaction between industry and higher education. In terms of priority setting, the review proposed that the process of generating proposals for CRCs and selecting successful applicants is itself a strong example of the best form of priority setting — that involving both research providers and users. Furthermore, the work of the centres helped significantly in promoting cooperation across agencies and sectors, and consequently enhanced coordination and attenuated gaps and overlaps in the science and technology system. More recently, the Higher Education White Paper (DETYA, 2000) outlined further policy initiatives designed to strengthen a national competitive grants system. The system is to be based heavily on investigator initiated research, with an emphasis on fostering more flexible research programs that demonstrate a “strengthened capacity to encourage research linked to industry” (p. 5). It is still too early to see substantial evidence of the CRC Program’s contribution to the national objectives of social and economic development, or to the establishment of internationally competitive industry sectors.

However, the

orientation of research activities being carried out under the program is providing excellent prospects of making this contribution in the future (Stocker, 1997). The Australian government contributes approximately $145 million per annum, through the CRC Program, to the Centres. Industry has already made commitments of more


42

than $1.4 billion for the term of the Centres established to date (DEST, 2002). Selection rounds are generally held every two years. These selection rounds replace or renew CRCs when they reach the end of their seven-year contract with the Government. It is expected that in each selection round there will be a considerable number of proposals for new Centres which will compete strongly against proposals from existing Centres. As at July 2001, there were 64 established CRCs operating. The established CRCs cover many areas of natural science and engineering: manufacturing technology (12 Centres), information and communications technology (7), mining and energy (8), agriculture and rural based manufacturing (12), environment (15), and medical science technology (10) (DEST, 2002). The CRC for Sustainable Tourism is one of the 15 CRCs under the umbrella of environment. 2.9 The CRC for Sustainable Tourism The CRC for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) was founded in 1995 with a view to developing and managing intellectual property to deliver innovation to industry, community and government to enhance the environmental, economic and social sustainability of tourism. The CRCST has acknowledged that one of the major challenges for them is the expansion of tourism research horizons (CRCST, 1999, 2000). This translates to the exploration of tourism potential by improving focus on sustainability, quality and collaboration through research. The CRCST has endeavoured to focus research effort on that which is of importance to industry while making the process “understandable without academic mystery thereby achieving incremental and quantifiable outcomes” (CRCST, 1999), p. 3). In an attempt to gauge their success in achieving this goal, the CRCST industry extension program periodically reviews outcomes from the project applications and consults with program and project leaders. It is thought that this


43

action will help underpin knowledge transfer activities, but should not supplant it (CRCST, 2002b). For the purposes of industry extension, an outcome refers to practical, understandable ‘tools’ for industry that can increase its performance, sustainability, or provide community benefit. These ‘tools’ can take the form of articles, reports, or other material that industry accesses free-to-air through web sites, direct contact, seminars, newsletters, or they may be commercial products such as publications, designs, or services that may be purchased (CRCST, 2002a). Currently, the CRCST has four integrated research programs designed to deliver the aforementioned outcomes. These programs are as follows: Tourism Environmental Management, Tourism Engineering, Design and Eco-technology, Tourism Policy, Products and Business and finally, E-Travel and Tourism. The Tourism Policy, Products and Business program was established after consultation with industry investigating strategic research needs coupled with recognition of the demands of industry, government and the community. The Tourism Policy, Products and Business program comprises several sub-programs, one of which focuses on destination management and regional tourism. The Regional Tourism sub-program includes an integrated research schedule focusing on the Gold Coast, which aims to provide a strategic assessment of future options for the Gold Coast (CRCST, 2000). This research program, called the Gold Coast Visioning Project, has provided the ideal context in which to investigate the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in cooperative research settings. The Gold Coast Visioning Project is discussed in more detail in Chapter Eight. 2.10 Collaborative Tourism Arrangements The establishment of collaborative networks between industry, science, and government in the strategic planning and management of cities and towns is


44

becoming increasingly popular (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Helling, 1998). Often referred to as ‘Visioning Projects’, these collaborative arrangements engage researchers and stakeholders in a process that involves building a shared vision for the future, developing scenarios that describe those possible futures, developing a learning culture among the stakeholders, and management of the tension between autonomy and cooperation among stakeholders.

This process is generally

underpinned by an ‘audit’ process. This involves an integrated series of research projects aimed at overviewing the current status of the region, city or town in question in terms of social, economic and environmental considerations. The audit process is accepted as a precursor to the Visioning process (Getz, 1986; Gunn, 1994; Inskeep, 1991). To some degree these collaborative research settings could be described as action research. While there are many definitions of action research, in the literature, discussion of action research tends to fall into two distinctive categories. In one category, action research is viewed as research oriented toward the enhancement of direct practice. A classic definition is offered by Carr and Kemmis (1986): Action research is simply a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own practices, their understanding of these practices, and the situations in which the practices are carried out (p. 162). This understanding of action research is located firmly in the realm of the practioners — it is tied to self-reflection and is close to the notion of reflective practice as framed by Schön (1983).


45

The second, and perhaps broader understanding of action research is that it is “the systematic collection of information that is designed to bring about social change” (Bogden & Biklen, 1992, p. 223).

In this instance, the practioners is

actively involved in the cause for which the research is conducted. Other distinctions of action research consider the process in terms of participatory (Whyte, 1991) or collaborative (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988) research. Regardless of the definition, action research is a flexible form of investigation that is able to respond to changes in that which is being studied. This flexibility is achieved through the cyclical or spiral process of action followed by critical reflection. This was first described by Lewin (1946, 1948), who is credited with coining the term ‘action research’ itself. The action research spiral is most certainly a legacy of Lewin, and while it is heuristically useful to describe the process of action research in this way, there is the danger that action research can be taken a little more than a procedure. According to McTaggart (1996), it is “... a mistake to think that the action research spiral constitutes doing action research” (p. 248). Action research is not merely a method or a procedure for research, but a series of commitments to observe and problematise through practice, a series of principles for conducting social research. Action research is a research paradigm that is united by a certain set of principles that draw attention to not the process, as much as the practices one engages in during the process – critical reflection and interpretation (Bogden & Biklen, 1992; Dick & Dalmau, 1999; Lewin, 1946; McTaggart, 1991, 1996; Schön, 1983; Whyte, 1991). This perspective means that it is essential to consider context and how that particular context affects judgements, and interpretations upon which those judgements are based. While Lewin (1946, 1948) does talk about action research as a method, he also stresses the contrast


46

between this form of interpretive practice, and the more traditional empiricalanalytical research. This distinction gives rise to the contentious issue of whether action research as a social science, is really a science. The artificiality of the distinctions of applied and basic research was alluded to earlier in this chapter. The problem of whether action research is really a science is largely definitional. By some definitions it is a science, by others it complements science (Dick & Dalmau, 1999). Action research, as a set of principles, places value on scepticism and empiricism in the pursuit of understanding (Newman, 1987, 2000). That is, in pursing knowledge it strives vigorously to disconfirm present view, and uses evidence to do that. If science is systematic and sceptical empiricism, then to that end, action research is scientific, and products of knowledge emerging through these collaborative research settings can be classified as products of science – tri lateral arrangements of knowledge production are an emergent form of scientific investigation. The philosophies underlying the CRC Program, therefore, fit well with a Visioning Project and are acknowledged in the findings of the most recent review of the CRC Program (DIST, 1998), which focussed on issues of commercialisation and self-funding within individual CRCs. While the review confirmed the role of the Program in enhancing collaborative activities between research providers and industry and the significance of effective linking mechanisms in the national innovation system, there were eight recommendations tabled. Two recommendations are of particular interest to the proposed study. First, it was recommended there should be an increase in CRC research that focused on the social sciences. The CRCST stands apart from other CRCs in that, along with environmental/biological studies, a major component of research has a social science


47

base. Accordingly, the second recommendation is timely and appropriate. The report (DIST, 1998) suggested the CRC Committee should support a range of longitudinal research projects investigating the outcomes of the CRCs and the nature of cooperation (p. 5). Since this manner of scientific enquiry is still evolving, little is understood about the nature of knowledge production in this environment and the research proposed here is consistent with such an investigation. The Gold Coast Visioning Project provides an ideal environment in which to pursue this line of enquiry. This is due to the magnitude of the project in terms of the amount of research being undertaken, the findings of which are intended to underpin the vision of a preferred future for the region. The time frame in which the Gold Coast Visioning Project has occurred has allowed an in-depth investigation of the processes involved in a tri-lateral arrangement of knowledge production. Additionally, the opportunity to engage in an ethnographic study in an organisational setting occasions the collection of a richness of data unattainable in experimental settings. These characteristics provide an opportunity to begin to develop an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project, which will serve to inform sociological enquiries into this emerging form of science production. This investigative approach to the CRC process requires a breakdown of the sequence of the stages of knowledge creation, knowledge diffusion and the eventual utilisation of knowledge, from its cognitive underpinnings to eventual use in decision making. These issues are addressed in the subsequent chapters, being investigated at individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels respectively. To do so will assist in the identification of relationships between knowledge acquisition and its eventual utilisation, the factors that influence these relationships and, in turn, the ultimate effectiveness of the Gold Coast Visioning Project.


48

CHAPTER THREE Knowledge Defined

The purpose of this chapter is to acquaint the reader with various descriptions and classifications of knowledge. Throughout this chapter it will become apparent that while there are many definitions and classifications of knowledge, there is a common element among them. Furthermore, this commonality exists for knowledge at individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels. It is necessary to establish a coherent understanding of knowledge that spans these levels of knowledge acquisition and utilisation in order to explore the relationships that exist among these levels of learning. Additionally, this level of understanding enables the development of a framework to underpin the analysis of this investigation. In so doing, it may be shown how these relationships manifest themselves in collaborative research settings and what factors impact on the acquisition and eventual application of knowledge. 3.1 Definitions of Knowledge Enquiries into knowledge have produced several varied definitions and classifications.

For some, knowledge is a basic human need used to reduce

uncertainty in people’s lives (Maslow, 1970). From this perspective, knowledge is used to structure an individual’s world, to categorise it and to interpret it in certain ways. The basic human need for knowledge, however, says nothing about what knowledge is. In general, the label ‘knowledge’ is given to information that is represented mentally in a particular format that is structured and organised in some manner. Information remains quite different from knowledge in that knowledge is linked to explicit theories and is embedded in a social context of explanation


49

(Johnston, 1998; Rowley, 2000a). Several other definitions follow along this theme. For example, knowledge is seen as information transformed into capabilities for effective action (uit Beijerse, 1999) or a collection of information and rules with which specific functions can be accomplished, or as Amidon (1999) states, information with meaning. While many classifications have been developed in an attempt to define knowledge, others have developed typologies of knowledge to achieve conceptual understanding. Among the many definitions of information and knowledge, there is a clear distinction between two types of knowledge, often referred to as tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka, 1991; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Polanyi, 1966; Zuboff, 1988). According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), explicit knowledge is that which “can be expressed in words and numbers and can easily be shared in the form of hard data, scientific formulae, codified procedures or universal principles” (p. 8). By contrast, tacit knowledge is “highly personal and hard to formalise.

Subjective insights,

intuitions and hunches fall into this category of knowledge” (p. 8). The concept of tacit knowledge was described in depth by Polanyi (1966) who wrote, “we know more than we can say” (p. 8). This dictum points to the phenomenon in which much that constitutes human skill remains unarticulated and known only to the person who has that skill (Madhavan & Grover, 1998). Analogous to the tacit and explicit dichotomy, Zuboff (1988) makes a distinction between embodied, or action-oriented skills, and intellective skills. Action-oriented skills develop through actual performance (i.e., learning by doing). Conversely, intellective skills combine abstraction, explicit reference, and procedural reasoning. These qualities make intellective skills easily representable as symbols and therefore, easily transferable (Zuboff, 1988). For others, however, the dichotomous definition


50

of knowledge fails to grasp fully the complex structure of knowledge. Several authors (Alter, 1999; Amidon, 1997; Tobin, 1996) have proposed an alternative classification based on a hierarchy of knowledge (see Figure 3.1): •

Data – facts and figures.

•

Information – data with context.

•

Knowledge — information with meaning.

•

Wisdom – knowledge with insight

From this perspective, it is only through meaning that information “finds life and becomes knowledge” (Bhatt, 2000, p. 70). If the difference between information and knowledge is dependant on users’ perspectives, then knowledge is context dependant, since ‘meanings’ are interpreted according to a particular frame of reference (Marakas, 1999). It is the attribution of relevance or meaning to information that constitutes learning — acquiring knowledge is a process of learning (Atherton, 2002). If we accept that there are levels of knowledge and that acquiring knowledge is a process of learning, then it stands to reason that there are also levels of learning (Bateson,

Wisdom

Knowledge

Information

Data

Figure 3.1. The hierarchical structure of knowledge (Amidon, 1997).


51

1973; Ramsdon, 1992). For the purpose of this thesis, there are two dominant streams of research into learning processes. One body of research stems from the deep and surface learning strategies studies, and the other from the work of Gregory Bateson (1973). Bateson maintained that many discussions about learning were confused by category errors about the kind of learning they were about. He suggested that there are a number of levels, in which each superior level is the class of its subordinates The levels of learning are depicted in Figure 3.2 and described as thus: • Learning 0 is direct experience: I put my hand in the fire – it gets burned. • Learning I is what we routinely refer to as learning: the generalisation from

basic experiences. I have experienced ‘hand in fire’ and ‘being burned’, and I won't do it again. • Learning II contextualises Learning I experiences. It is about developing

strategies for maximising Learning I through the extraction of implicit rules, and also putting specific bits of Learning I in context: I don't generally risk getting burned, but I might do so to save someone else from a fire. • Learning III contextualises Learning II, and is not understood, but it may be

the existential (or spiritual) level: What does it say about me that I would risk getting burned in order to save someone else from a fire? The higher the level of learning, the less an individual may understand about the process, and although such higher level of learning undoubtedly takes place, the more difficult it is to deliberately manage it (Atherton, 2002).


52

Learning III

Learning II

Learning I

Learning 0

Levels of Learning

Figure 3.2. Bateson’s (1973) levels of learning.

A further conception of learning considers the process form a depth of processing perspective, classifying learning as either ‘deep’ or ‘surface’ processes. The features of deep and surface learning are summarised in Table 3.1 however, it is important to clarify also what these levels of learning are not. Although learners may be classified as ‘deep’ or ‘surface’, they are not attributes of an individual. One person may use both forms of learning at different times, although it is possible that they may hold a preference for one form of learning over the other (Ramsden, 1992). In summary, acquiring knowledge demands that some form of learning takes place and that the level to which an individual acquires knowledge is dependent on the depth of processing they apply to incoming information. While the literature cited thus far describes knowledge and the process of attaining knowledge from a hierarchical perspective, it is important to note that there are also differing forms of knowledge that individuals acquire.


53

Table 3.1.

Features of Deep and Surface approaches to learning.

Approach to Learning Deep

Surface

Focus is on “what is signified”

Focus is on the “signs” (or on the learning as a signifier of something else)

Relates previous knowledge to new knowledge

Focus on unrelated parts of the task

Relates knowledge from different courses

Information for assessment is simply memorised

Relates theoretical ideas to everyday experience

Facts and concepts are associated unreflectively

Relates and distinguishes evidence and argument

Principles are not distinguished from examples

Organises and structures content into coherent whole

Task is treated as an external imposition

Emphasis is internal, from within the individual

Emphasis is external, from demands of assessment

Recently there has emerged some more sophisticated and grounded categories of knowledge (Johnston, 1998; Amidon, 1997; Knorr-Cetina, 1981; Savage, 1996; Weiss, 1980). Following the analysis of Collins (1993), Blackler (1995) proposed five categories of knowledge: (1) embrained – dependent on conceptual and cognitive skills, conflated with scientific knowledge and accorded superior status;


54

(2) embodied – action-oriented, partially explicit, acquired by doing and rooted in specific context; (3) encultured – the process of achieving shared understanding embedded in cultural systems, socially constructed and open to negotiation; (4) embedded – resides in systematic routines and relies on the interplay of relationships and material resources, i.e., embedded in technology practices or explicit routines and procedures; (5) encoded – that recorded in signs or symbols. A further classification has been developed by Fleck (1997), whereby the different categories of knowledge he has identified are embodied in differing ways. This categorisation is summarised in Table 3.2. Along with the interest in the knowledge economy and knowledge management, more recent approaches to classification of knowledge have their focus on economically useful definitions of knowledge Savage, 1996; Sveiby, 1997).

(Lundvall & Johnson, 1994;

Perhaps the most encompassing approach to the

present has been the work of Lundvall (1994), expanded upon further by Savage (1996) who cumulatively proposed six categories of knowledge: • know-what – structural knowledge, patterns; • know-how – a skill, procedures; • know-who – who can help with a question or task; • know-why – a deeper form of knowledge that includes comprehension of the

broader context; • know-when – a sense of timing and rhythm;


55

Table 3.2.

Categorical descriptions of the structure of knowledge (Fleck, 1997).

Category

Description

Formal knowledge

•

embodied in codified theories, formulae,

•

usually encoded in textual or diagrammatic form,

•

acquired through formal learning

•

embodied in tool and instrument use, requires other

Instrumentalities

components (informal, tacit and contingent) Informal knowledge

•

learnt through demonstration and practice

•

embodied in verbal interaction (rules of thumb, “tricks of trade”)

Contingent knowledge

Tacit knowledge

Meta-knowledge

•

held in verbal and sometimes written form

•

learnt through interaction with a specific context/milieu

•

embodied in the specific context

•

distributed

•

can appear trivial

•

acquired by on-the-spot learning

•

embodied in people

•

rooted in practice and experience

•

transmitted by apprenticeship/mentorship

•

embodied in the organisation

•

general value, cultural, and philosophical assumptions

•

can

be

local

or

cosmopolitan

acquired

through

socialisation

•

know-where – a sense of place, where it is best to do something. No pre-eminence is accorded to any category, but rather, the categorisation is

acknowledgement of the significant contribution each component offers to achieving desired outcomes, relative to its own appropriate context (Lundvall, 1994; Savage, 1996). Therefore, knowledge is not only contextual in terms of a users’ particular


56

frame of reference (Bhatt, 2000; Marakas, 1999), but also in terms of what form of knowledge is deemed appropriate in a particular situation. Thus, the contextual nature of individual knowledge in large part, governs the ability of individuals and groups to acquire knowledge. A feature of group learning, and one that is pertinent to this discussion, is how groups acquire knowledge and how that, in turn, is utilised in subsequent decision making activities. Of specific interest are the processes that underlie the acquisition of knowledge through the elicitation or sharing of knowledge that group members may already possess, or through the generation of new or ‘emergent’ knowledge through collaboration and interaction. The term ‘emergent’ refers to knowledge that no individual member of the group possessed prior to group interaction or discussion, but surfaces throughout the course of the discussion (Argote, 1999).

The factors that would influence the

realisation of emergent knowledge in groups have been the subject of much research (Argote et al., 2001; Argote & Ingram, 2000; Cohen & Bailey, 1997; Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Gruenfeld & Hollingshead, 1993; Janis, 1982; Karau & Williams, 1993; Lamm, 1988; Larson, Foster-Fisherman, & Franz, 1998; Larson, Foster-Fisherman, & Keys, 1994; Larson, Christensen, Abbott, & Franz, 1996; Levine & Thompson, 1996; Nonaka, 1991; Scheidel & Crowell, 1979; Stasser, Taylor, & Hanna, 1989; Stasser & Titus, 1987; Towle, Goldophin, Greenhalgh, & Gambrill, 1999). These factors will be considered in greater detail in subsequent chapters. However, it is heuristically useful at this point to acknowledge that these factors can be classified as issues relating to cognition, communication or social contingencies (Beesley, 2001). Knowledge is now widely recognised as that which will give organisations a competitive edge (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000; Etzkowitz & Webster, 1998;


57

Grossman & Helpman, 1994; Liebowitz, 1999; OECD, 1996; PMSEIC, 1999a; Romer, 1994; Slatyer, 1992a; Stankiewicz, 1998). Accordingly, organisations are increasingly pursuing systems designed to manage the knowledge that exists within them.

In recent years there has been a great deal written about organisational

learning and the management of knowledge in organisations (Liebowitz, 1999), yet because of the considerable hype and confusion that has characterised the emergence of these concepts (Mentzas, Apolostolou, Young, & Abecker, 2001), these ideas remain problematic (Crosson, Lane, & White, 1999). The predominant definitions of organisational knowledge tend to describe organisational knowledge as a form of capital (Delahaye, 2001; Sveiby, 1997). While individual knowledge is necessary for developing the organisational knowledge base, organisational knowledge should not be seen as simply the sum of individual knowledge (Bhatt, 2001). For some, organisational knowledge is seen as the collective sum of human-centred assets, intellectual property assets, infrastructure assets, and market assets (Brooking, 1996). However, for others, knowledge is seen as a unique and different asset (Sveiby, 1997). The unique nature of knowledge lies in the fact that 1) there is no law of diminishing returns, knowledge is not intrinsically scarce; 2) there is a difference between information and knowledge; 3) knowledge cannot be hoarded – the competitive edge occasioned through knowledge is only temporary as competitors learn from each other; 4) knowledge grows from sharing; 5) knowledge can be created by anyone; and, 6) unlike information, knowledge is not subject to copyrights or patents. It is not possible to copyright an idea, only expressions of the idea (Delahaye, 2001; Sveiby, 1997)

Others (Myers, 1996) describe it in more active

terms stating that organisational knowledge is processed information embedded in


58

routines and processes that enable action. Furthermore, it is also knowledge that is captured by the organisation’s systems, processes, products, rules and culture. Bhatt (2001) suggests that because the pattern of interaction between technologies, techniques and people in the development and management of knowledge is unique to any given organisation, it cannot be easily traded in the market place and imitated by other organisations. This means that while methods and systems of organisational knowledge development and management may be traded and adopted by organisations, the manner in which such systems and methods become manifest is unique to each organisation. Bhatt (2000, 2001) explains this further by suggesting that organisations possess two types of knowledge; foreground knowledge and background knowledge. These two forms of knowledge are analogous to the ‘explicit/tacit’ dichotomy described earlier. Foreground knowledge can be ‘explicitly’ expressed in words and numbers and can easily be shared in the form of hard data. It can also be captured, codified and imitated. Conversely, background knowledge is ‘tacit’ and ‘sticky’ which makes it difficult to replicate and imitate – what is known can not be easily expressed or conveyed to others. It is thought that it is not the intensity of background knowledge that facilitates superior performance of an organisation. More accurately, it is the strength of the symbiotic relationship between foreground and background knowledge that shapes the core competencies of the organisation, which in turn, occasions sustainable advantages. Delahaye (2001) takes a systems approach to knowledge in organisations and suggests that organisations have two basic systems – the legitimate system and the shadow system. The role of the legitimate system is to ensure that the organisation survives the immediate future by the efficient use of the system’s resources and strives to maintain the status quo. The shadow system, on the other hand, provides


59

the organisation with energy, usually in the form of knowledge, that will ensure the organisation’s long term future. Each system has significant roles to play and should be given appropriate power and energy to fulfil their roles. Further to this, and similarly to Bhatt (2000; 2001), the symbiotic relationship between the two systems needs to be carefully managed.

In this way, the organisation hovers between

equilibrium and chaos, a state referred to as bounded instability, thus enhancing the strengths of both systems (Delahaye, 2001). This concept is explored in more detail in Chapter Six. The information presented thus far has demonstrated that, although there are disparate views on what constitutes knowledge, the common theme among them is that knowledge is information that is organised in some manner so as to imbue it with meaning. Additionally, this theme permeates individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels of learning. What this means is that regardless of the level of learning, some sense of relevance must be attributed to the information. This being the case, to understand the dynamics of knowledge production in collaborative research settings, it is necessary to understand how information is endorsed with relevance or meaning in individuals and groups, and both within and between organisations.

From this perspective it becomes apparent that the move from

information to knowledge is essential in order to move from research to application, which is the ultimate goal of collaborative research undertakings. This is pivotal to the understanding of the degree to which knowledge is eventually utilised in collaborative settings, since common sense dictates that there can be no application of knowledge if it is not first acquired. Therefore, it is clear that being attentive to the ways in which individuals and groups acquired new information and subsequently endorsed this with their own meanings and relevance, would be critical


60

to understanding the ways in which knowledge moves through a collaborative research setting, such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project, and the degree to which this knowledge is, or is not utilised. While the aforementioned concept of knowledge may have heuristic appeal, it reveals little of how knowledge is ascribed with relevance and meaning and constructed in the minds of individuals, which in turn facilitates group, organisational and inter-organisational learning. Chapter Five examines how groups acquire knowledge, while Chapter Six explores organisational and inter organisational learning and knowledge capture within those domains.

Before

moving to this point, however, it is appropriate to examine how individuals acquire knowledge. The way in which information is accorded meaning and then organised in the mind of an individual is underpinned by elaborate cognitive activity. This is the focus of discussion in the following chapter.


61

CHAPTER FOUR Individual Knowledge Acquisition

The purpose of this chapter is to create an understanding of the processes that underlie the ways in which individuals ascribe relevance or meaning to information and, in so doing, acknowledge the factors that influence these processes. Through a synthesis of current research, it will be shown that knowledge acquisition is a process that is far more complex than the existing assumptions that underlie the CRC Program (DIST, 1995; Slatyer, 1990, 1993; Stocker, 1997). That is, that in such settings, it cannot be assumed that the knowledge created will be of direct and immediate applicability to industry participants — it need not follow that such knowledge will used for solving problems relative to the scientific enquiry that has taken place. The content of this chapter will demonstrate the social influences on knowledge acquisition, the role of affect3 in social cognition and the constructivist nature of knowledge attainment. This information challenges the assumptions that underlie the CRC Program and, in so doing, demonstrates how these assumptions fail to account for extant cognitive complexities of humans. This is fundamental to the current research since a primary objective of the CRCST (and indeed, the CRC program) is to produce research that is pertinent to industry while also being “understandable [and] without academic mystery, thereby achieving quantifiable

3

The term ‘affect’ is commonly used to encompass a variety of experiences such as emotions, moods and preferences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000; Fiske & Taylor, 1991). For the purpose of this paper, the term ‘emotion’ shall be used to refer to fairly brief but intense experiences that have a more specific focus (Forgas, 1995), whereas ‘mood’ shall refer to low-intensity but more prolonged experiences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000). Although all three terms (emotion, mood and affect) will be used throughout this thesis, affect will be used in a broad sense to refer to the entire constellation of emotion and feeling states that are experienced by individuals.


62

outcomes” (CRCST, 1999, p. 3). To demonstrate the complexities of knowledge acquisition, several different perspectives are drawn upon. Consequently, it will become apparent why in spite of its significant economic and geopolitical force and role as a prime shaper of national policies on almost all issues (Johnston & Blumentritt, 1998), knowledge is not typically utilised in a direct and supportive manner in decision making or policy formulation (Weiss, 1980). Why knowledge is not used systematically to inform decision making and policy formulation has been the focus of much enquiry. Social scientists have sought to describe and explain the use of knowledge and, in so doing, have generated a massive body of research investigating the influence of social factors on the acquisition,

dissemination

and

utilisation

of

knowledge

(Paisley,

1993).

Simultaneously, cognitive psychologists have produced several theories attempting to explain the structure and mechanisms of the cognitive processes underlying the acquisition, creation and use of knowledge (see Eysenck & Keane, 2000 for a review).

Social cognitive theories strive to integrate social and psychological

processes in order to map the cognitive processes that underlie social interaction and associated affect (Forgas, 2000; Forgas & George, in press). In this chapter, each of these perspectives is explored in terms of knowledge acquisition and utilisation at an individual level.

Information produced by research in collaborative settings

occasions the opportunity for individuals to create new knowledge structures as they apply meaning to that information. Therefore, a psychological approach that draws on both cognitive, social, and socio-cognitive theories is particularly useful to understand how information moves to knowledge in individuals. Parallel distributed processing (PDP) models, or connectionist networks


63

provide a platform from which to consider cognitive processes at the micro level. These are described in the first section of this chapter. How an individual’s existing knowledge, or ‘theories-in-use’ affect the degree to which new knowledge is incorporated into one’s knowledge structure, and the cognitive activity that accompanies this integration, is then discussed. The focus of the chapter then moves to the role of affect and underlying socialisation issues that become manifest as individuals attach personal relevance to incoming information. In order to establish such relevance, one must attend to the information being presented. Accordingly, the constraints on individual attentional systems are discussed, relative to the demands placed on the cognitive system when acquiring knowledge. The issue of ‘creative’ versus ‘straight’ application of knowledge is also considered. The chapter concludes with a synthesis of these approaches in order to present a comprehensive understanding of the complexities inherent to knowledge acquisition in individuals and subsequently, how this impacts upon the existing assumptions of the CRC Program. To arrive at this point, the chapter commences with an overview of the cognitive underpinnings of knowledge acquisition. 4.1 Cognitive Underpinnings of Knowledge Acquisition A commonly used construct to account for complex knowledge organisation in individuals is the schema. In broad terms, schemata (or schemas) are plans, outlines, structures or frameworks that are, in essence, the building blocks of cognition (Rumelhart, 1980). The underlying assumption of the construct is that schemata are cognitive mental plans that are abstract. Eysenck and Keane (2000) describes a schema as a “structured cluster of concepts involving generic knowledge that may be used to represent events, sequences of events, precepts, situations, relations and even objects” (p. 252). The concept of schemata is, however, very


64

broad and as an organising structure for knowledge, it takes different forms when representing different forms of knowledge (Rumelhart & Norman, 1981). More recently, different cognitive functions commonly attributed to schemata activated in the processing of information have been identified. There is now an accepted awareness of processing distinctions (Pascual-Leone, 1997) such as those between executive processes (those that embody plans for action) and action processes (which implement actions, representations or performance of any sort). Consequently, there are many functionally different collectives of schemata (Gardner, 1982, 1983; Gardner, Howard, & Perkins, 1974; Gardner & Wolf, 1983). These encompass executive and action (Pascual-Leone, 1997), logical and conceptual (Wilkes, 1997), experiential (Pascual-Leone, 1984), affective (Bower, 1981; Forgas, 1999)) and intersubjective functions that are capable of dynamically interacting with each other (Pascual-Leone, 1997). Acknowledgement of affect is considered important as cognitive goals are said to be ultimately affective and, in turn, activate the executive schemes and knowledge schemes congruous to them (Forgas & George, in press; Pascual-Leone, 1997).

This suggests that for all

information received there are different processes occurring at various levels, ranging from the surface aspects of problems to deeper, more inclusive and integrative structures. As individuals extend their knowledge base, they tend to move from the surface aspects of problems to deeper structures (Hardiman, Dufresne, & Mestre, 1989). Such structures involve the formation of schemata that allow a more open, inclusive, discriminatory, and integrative understanding of one’s experiences (Zeichner & Liston, 1987). It extends beyond technical expertise and draws upon objectives, situational contexts, affective responses and ethical considerations (Forgas & George, in press; Johnston & Blumentritt, 1998; Knorr-Cetina, 1980)


65

Even with depth of processing taken into account, schema theory is not without its problems, most notably, its inflexibility (Eysenck & Keane, 1992). For example, by proposing that there are distinct types of knowledge structures it places some constraint on the nature of structures proposed. Furthermore, schema theorists have not generally been noted for their concerns with the mechanisms of schema acquisition (Eysenck & Keane, 2000). However, Rumelhart and Norman (1981) proposed three basic ways learning could occur in a schema-based system: accretion, tuning and restructuring. In learning by accretion, one simply records a new instance of an existing schema and adds it to one’s repertoire.

Tuning refers to the

elaboration and refinement of concepts through experience. Restructuring involves the creation of new schemata through analogy or schema induction (via the repetition of spatio-temporal configuration of schemata). In the case of restructuring through analogy, one takes an existing schema and applies some aspects of it on to a novel situation while at the same time, altering some other aspects of it (Rumelhart & Norman, 1981). Additionally, it was argued that to fully understand knowledge as representation of schemata, one is required to adopt a different framework of thinking and consider the intuitive flexibility of the schemata approach (Rumelhart, Smolensky, McClelland, & Hinton, 1986). In this arrangement, there is no representational construct, which is a schema, but only patterns of activation, which produce the sorts of effects attributed to schema. Schemata emerge at the moment they are needed from the interaction of parallel processing elements all working in unison with each other. In other words, schemata become patterns of activation within an individual’s knowledge network. These networks are explained through connectionist models that treat cognitive activity as deriving from the abatement and augmentation of


66

stimulation in neural networks as it is channelled by associative constraints laid down from past experience (Lehman, Laird, & Rosenbloom, 1995). The detail presented so far serves to lay the foundation for a framework that will explain how knowledge is constructed in the mind of individuals and how, and to what extent, new knowledge is incorporated into existing cognitive structures. Accordingly, this framework will be used in later analysis in an attempt to identify how and at what point in the construction of knowledge, other factors (such as social contingencies and affect) impact upon the process. The following section describes the construction of knowledge in individuals drawing on theories of connectionist networks. 4.2 Connectionist Networks Connectionist networks consist of elementary or neuron-like units or nodes, connected together so that a single node has many links to other nodes. Each of these other nodes can transmit an excitatory or inhibitory signal to the first node. This node generally takes a weighted sum of all these inputs (Rumelhart, Hinton et al., 1986). If this sum exceeds some threshold, it produces an output that may then feed into another node, which does the same. These networks can model cognitive behaviour without recourse to the kinds of explicit IF –THEN rules found in production systems (Eysenck & Keane, 1992). This is accomplished by associating various inputs with certain outputs, and then by storing patterns of activation, or associations within the network. The models customarily engage several layers to deal with any complex behaviour (Rumelhart, Smolensky et al., 1986). As shown in Figure 4.1, one layer comprises input nodes where stimuli are encoded as a pattern of activation in those nodes. This activation produces a response in another layer as a pattern of activation. When the network has learned to produce a particular output in


67

(c) Output Layer

(b) Internal Representation Layer

(c) (a)

Input Layer

(b) Figure 4.1. A multi-layered connectionist network showing (a) an input layer, (b) internal representation layer and (c) an output layer (adapted from Rumelhart, Hinton et al., 1986).

response to a particular input, it can behave in a manner as though an IF –THEN rule has been applied, however, no such rule exists in the model (Eysenck & Keane, 1992). In instances where combinations of nodes work closely together, the more conventional notion of schema is realised; where the nodes are more loosely interconnected, the structures are more fluid and less ‘schema’ like (Rumelhart, 1989; Rumelhart, Hinton et al., 1986) An important aspect of connectionist networks is the learning rule or algorithm used to form patterns of activation in the network as information is


68

attributed with meaning (Anderson, 1995a). Backward propagation, or BackProp, allows a network to learn to associate a particular output pattern with a particular input pattern.

During the early stages of learning, new input patterns produce

inappropriate output patterns through the random connections among the nodes. BackProp compares this unsuitable pattern with an appropriate response pattern, noting the errors that occur. It then back-propagates activation through the network adjusting weights within the network so as to reduce network error. This process is repeated with a particular input pattern until the network produces a good approximation to the correct answer (Anderson, 1995b). The development and elaboration of connectionist networks in schemas is advanced

by

the

application

of

concepts

that

are

Piagetian

in

origin. Although Piaget was concerned with cognitive change in children, his fundamental position regarding the ways in which cognitive change occurs is shared by other structuralists (Gardner, 1981; Leiber, 1978; Piaget,

1970),

and

has

been

extended

into

adult

cognition

by

other

structural psychologists, most notably Kohlberg (Kohlberg, Levine, & Hewer, 1983).

The

key

idea

is

that

the

processes

of

assimilation

and

accommodation are the two processes that best account for the cognitive change that ocurrs when information is imbued with relevance and meaning. From a structuralist approach, whenever an event is experienced and given meaning, two processes are jointly involved – assimilation and accommodation. An event or new knowledge is invested with meaning by assimilating it to some relevant knowledge schema (Piaget, 1956). Whenever assimilation occurs, accommodation must also occur as the activated schema accommodates any unique features of the input (Piaget & Garcia, 1987). Accommodation therefore, implies change, through


69

either elaboration of the existing schema or the creation of a new node within the schema (Montangero & Maurice-Naville, 1997). These same principles may be applied to connectionist networks. Input nodes initiate patterns of activation, which stimulate output nodes. In the instance of new knowledge, new connections between input and, in turn, output nodes are activated. In this way, networks assimilate new information and accommodate it into the network through either elaboration of associations within existing nodes or the creation of new nodes within the network. Learning within the network by way of restructuring occurs through a process Piaget would describe as décalage (Piaget, 1956), which translated loosely, means discontinuity (Reber, 1985).

Similarly to BackProp, décalages are functional

analogies between constructions of different, successive structures. This process gives rise to certain repetitions which, on some occasions resemble returns to the existing structures, as if some of the alignments formerly attained had to be rediscovered on the successive structures (Eysenck & Keane, 1992). While there are different kinds of décalage (Montangero & Maurice-Naville, 1997), throughout this thesis the term is used collectively for the nonsynchronous appearance of new knowledge structures. 4.3 Conditions for the Restructuring of Networks. If new information stimulates unfamiliar input patterns of activation, then it follows that a search for appropriate associations will be engaged (Lehman et al., 1995).

The results of this search may reveal insufficient patterns of activation

(Wilkes, 1997), conflict between existing associations within the network and incoming information (S. Strauss, 1987), or appropriate patterns of activation with which to assimilate the information (Lehman et al., 1995). The first two options involve both continuity and discontinuity in patterns of activation. The continuity


70

involved in knowledge development is functional in so much as it encompasses the mechanisms of assimilation and accommodation which occur as previous structures are integrated into the new structures as subsystems (Montangero & MauriceNaville, 1997; Newell, Rosenbloom, & Laird, 1989). Discontinuity results from the reorganisation of nodes on a new plane through which new structures emerge (Montangero & Maurice-Naville, 1997). This interpretation of schema instantiation within a network is referred to as a process of constraint satisfaction (Holyoak & Thagard, 1989; Thagard, 1989; Thagard et al., in press; Wilkes, 1997). The various network activities, simultaneously occurring in parallel, are said to relax into a stable state when the best fit between input constraints, and internal constraints based on weights between connections, is reached (Lehman et al., 1995; Thagard, 1989; Thagard et al., in press). From this perspective, knowledge acquisition is a series of decision making tasks to solve ‘problems’ within neural networks. When two potentially incompatible representational strategies are currently active within the one problem space, the solver is presented with a unique opportunity for cross mapping one network onto another (Graessner, Millis, & Long, 1986; Rumelhart, 1989).

The agency for change is not the subjective state of

cognitive conflict per se, but the cross mapping that can occur when contradictory beliefs happen to excite the same pattern of activation contemporaneously (Wilkes, 1997). The subjective experience of cognitive conflict is a potential sign that some mental configuration predisposed to change has emerged. Although there can be no guarantee that the new representational structure will resolve the current difficulty on any given occasion, this outcome is more likely than if these disparate components had been left in abeyance (Smolensky, 1988). If this interpretation is correct, then it stands to reason that conflict should not be the only indicator of when cross mapping


or restructuring is possible.

71

Any situation where two previously separate

representational schemata are brought into the same workspace will present comparable occasion for cognitive advance (Lawler, 1981; S. Strauss, 1987). Conflict may signal the presence of such an opportunity, but so too may the experience of unexpected agreement – as when two formerly independent reasoning strategies are unexpectedly found to generate outputs that are in agreement with each other (Wilkes, 1997). Whilst many have championed one of these catalysts for cognitive change over another (Bryant, 1986; Lehman et al., 1995; Piaget, 1980; S. Strauss, 1987), other studies have shown that subjective states of conflict and agreement are not so much harbingers to change as they are signs that reflective attention is engaged and, in turn, a new spiral of logical disputation is meshing (Thagard et al., in press). This section of the chapter has served to inform the reader of the cognitive processes an individual engages in when they seek to attribute incoming information with personal relevance and then incorporate that new knowledge into existing knowledge structures. By viewing the cognitive system as a network of associations, it becomes apparent how individuals organise information and attribute meaning to it so that it might become knowledge. What is of importance now is to recognise the processes that prepare the cognitive system for functioning since these determine, in large part, what knowledge structures become activated as an individual engages in the search for personal relevance to attach to information.

This next section

introduces the complex series of factors that influence individual knowledge acquisition and begins to establish in the mind of the reader why the assumptions that currently underpin the knowledge production approach of the CRC Program might be inappropriate. The processes that prepare the cognitive system for functioning


72

activate, or ‘prime’ existing cognitive structures in which the individual attempts to incorporate information. 4.4 Priming as Network Mobilisation. Nodes that are mobilised prior to the activation of input nodes ‘prime’ or influence which input nodes are to be activated and, in turn, the subsequent excitatory or inhibitory responses in the network (J. R. Anderson, 1996). These can include priming of any or several of the various functionally different collectives of network associations. In decision making and judgement tasks, research has shown that effects of priming can be negative or positive (Strack & Mussweiler, 1997). In other words, the direction of a given priming effect is determined by the distinctiveness of primed knowledge and the similarity between primed knowledge and activated nodes within the problem space (Stapel & Koomen, 1998). It is suggested that the same effects would be apparent in knowledge acquisition. Where primed activation predisposes the network to activity responsible for generating the correct response, it would lead to increased performance in terms of the rapidity and ease with which new knowledge is incorporated into the network. In this instance, priming would be seen to have positively affected cognitive performance. Priming is considered to have a neutral effect if the primed activation leads to unrelated associations (Haberlandt, 1994). When priming leads to the activation of competing associations, cognitive activity would increase in an attempt to resolve the conflicts (Anderson, 1995b).

In this instance, the velocity of knowledge acquisition is

retarded and there simultaneously exists the potential for either inaccurate or adaptive knowledge structures to emerge. It is also of value to view this process from another perspective where learning is classified according to outcomes. From this stance, the application of


73

existing skills in new ways is referred to as ‘adaptive’ learning (Maehr & Midgley, 1991).

Therefore, the current theories-in-use or frame of reference is deemed

appropriate to apply to a novel situation. In alignment with the additional cognitive effort required in resolving logical disputation as mentioned above, learning that requires cognitive reframing is termed ‘generative’ learning (Wittrock, 1989). Such learning has also been referred to as ‘double-loop’ learning (Argyris & Schon, 1996) or, ‘learning to learn’ (Michael, 1973). Such learning requires the learner to reframe, to develop new conceptions and attitudes, to cognitively re-label existing classifications and amend standards of judgment. In this instance, current theoriesin-use are deemed inappropriate and the individual is required to develop a new frame of reference as a means by which to understand their environment. Such changes increase the learner's capacity to deal with situations in new ways and are fundamental to the development of completely new skills (Senge, 1990). At this point it is salient to note that classical analyses of knowledge acquisition has, in the main, been conducted in experimental conditions that have either attempted to control for, or have not acknowledged the role of, affect in cognitive functioning. As expressed by Gardner (1985), emotion is an element “which may be important for cognitive functioning but whose inclusion at this point would unnecessarily complicate the cognitive-scientific enterprise” (p. 6). In spite of this unaccommodating viewpoint, there has been a great deal of research in recent times investigating the interaction of cognition and emotion (Forgas, 1995; 1999; 2000a; 2000b; Lazarus, 1982; Murphy & Zajonic, 1993; Parkinson & Manstead, 1992; Power & Dalgleish, 1997; Smith & Lazarus, 1993; Speisman, Lazarus, Mordkoff, & Davidson, 1964; Steptoe & Vogele, 1986; Zajonc, 1980, 1984). Since these interactions prevail constantly in everyday life, it is thought that any


74

investigation into cognitive activities relevant to everyday life, but which fails to acknowledge emotion, would not be generalisable to real-world thinking. Accordingly, it is necessary to recognise the role of affect in the cognitive processes mentioned thus far. 4.5 The Role of Affect in Knowledge Acquisition The previous section discussed how networks are activated through priming, but it is important to note that priming can also include affective responses. The term ‘affect’ is commonly used to encompass a variety of experiences such as emotions, moods and preferences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000; Fiske & Taylor, 1991). For the purpose of this thesis, the term ‘emotion’ shall be used to refer to fairly brief but intense experiences that have a more specific focus (Forgas, 1995), whereas ‘mood’ shall refer to low-intensity but more prolonged experiences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000). Although all three terms (emotion, mood and affect) will be used throughout this thesis, affect will be used in a broad sense to refer to the entire constellation of emotion and feeling states that are experienced by individuals. Much debate has been raised over whether affect requires cognitive processing, or whether it can occur independently of cognitive activity (Lazarus, 1982; Murphy & Zajonic, 1993; Parkinson & Manstead, 1992; Power & Dalgleish, 1997; Smith & Lazarus, 1993; Speisman, Lazarus, Mordkoff, & Davidson, 1964; Steptoe & Vogele, 1986; Zajonc, 1980, 1984). Zajonc (1980, 1984) claimed that stimuli could be evaluated affectively in the absence of cognitive processing. He argued that affect and cognition were separate and partially independent systems and that although they often operate interdependently, affect could originate without prior cognitive processing. Conversely, Lazarus (1982) maintained that in order for a stimulus to engender an affective reaction, some level of cognitive processing must


75

take place. Therefore, he argued that cognitive appraisal played a fundamental role in affective experience. This argument was based on the suggestion that meaning or significance underpins and is an essential element of all emotional states, and for such meaning or significance to be attributed to any affective experience, some form of cognitive appraisal must take place. Since these theories have been based on experimental research findings, others (Parkinson & Manstead, 1992; Power & Dalgleish, 1997; Steptoe & Vogele, 1986) have argued that the debate is meaningless since the artificial nature of the experimental settings fails to replicate ordinary affective states and the social context in which emotion is normally experienced is de-emphasised (Parkinson & Manstead, 1992). Accordingly, it has not always proved easy to replicate research findings (Steptoe & Vogele, 1986). Zajonc (1980) provided evidence that affective responses may occur outside of conscious awareness, which Lazarus (1980) does not dispute, but this is fundamentally different to affective responses occurring in the absence of cognitive processing. For Power and Dalgleish (1997), the distinction between cognition and emotion put forth in the Zajonc – Lazarus debate is false. They state that while it is heuristically useful to use different names for different aspects of the origins of affect, the parts are inseparable.

While others suggest that this view may

overemphasise the interrelatedness of cognition and emotion (Eysenck & Keane, 2000), the debate has spawned the view that affective states may influence subsequent cognitive activity, and vice versa. This discussion brings to light three issues that are pertinent to the current study. First, there are few field studies that have lent themselves to the investigation of cognition and emotion in real life settings. Second, the possibility that associative


76

networks contain connections to affective states that may become activated outside of conscious awareness implies that meanings may be attributed to information without the individual being cognizant of how or why these associations have formed yet, since they exist, they may be drawn upon in subsequent cognitive tasks. Finally, that where an affective state is brought in to the realms of conscious awareness when attempting to acquire knowledge, there exists the potential for ‘cognitive overload’. This is because the increased cognitive demands associated with the restructuring of neural networks and attributing meaning to the affective state are brought into the one attentional space. This attentional space is referred to as ‘working memory’ and the greater the cognitive effort, the greater the demands on working memory as various patterns of activation are brought into the problem space. To understand why knowledge is not typically drawn upon in a direct and supportive manner in decision making is to accept that the process of individual knowledge acquisition is systematically flawed due to the physiological limitations of the working memory. To acknowledge these limitations creates an awareness of the ‘cognitive shortcuts’ or heuristics people employ when acquiring and utilising knowledge. 4.6 Taxonomy of Working Memory. As proposed by Baddeley (1986), working memory is a limited capacity unit consisting of three components: a phonological loop, a visuospatial sketchpad and a central executive (see Figure 4.2).

The phonological loop specialises in verbal

rehearsal for the processing and interim storage of verbal material. The visuospatial sketchpad facilitates the short-term storage and manipulation of visual and/or spatial information. It accepts input from visual perception as well as visual memory. The central executive resembles attention and is involved in active processing, planning


Visuospatial sketchpad

Central executive

77

Phonological loop

Figure 4.2. The dimensions of working memory as described by Baddeley (1986) include the visuospatial sketchpad, the phonological loop, and the central executive.

and decision making, and acts as a trouble-shooter when lower processing systems seem inadequate. The central executive is the highest level processing component of the system as it is neither a store nor processor of modality specific operations. Rather, the central executive is the processor that allocates resources to the two subsidiary systems; it governs attentional and automatic processes. The fundamental principle of a working memory system is that it is concerned with both active processing and transient storage of information, a concept that is important to the understanding of its inherent limitations (Baddeley, 1986). According to Sarason (1984, 1988) the level of difficulty associated with problem solving is relative to the degree to which attentional resources are drawn upon (Sarason, 1984, 1988). It then follows that if knowledge acquisition is viewed as a series of problem solving decisions, the greater the restructuring of networks in order to incorporate new knowledge, then the greater the demand on attentional resources. This stance, however, does not take into account other components of the working memory such as transfer and storage processes.

For example, when


78

multiple patterns of activation are present within a problem space (such as affect and multiple knowledge structures), then the transfer and transient storage of elemental components within the network required for the restructuring of networks is not acknowledged. To recognise working memory as a system that is concerned with both active processing and transient storage of information, means that tasks can also be difficult because of their demands on either processing resources or on transient storage capacity (Eysenck & Calvo, 1992), not just attentional demands. Accordingly, the acquisition of knowledge has the potential to place enormous demands on the working memory system.

To reduce cognitive demand, complex situations are

converted to simpler forms through mental shortcuts often referred to as heuristics (Haberlandt, 1994). Heuristics are demonstrations of the general human tendency toward mental economy (Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993) — the tendency for humans to behave as ‘cognitive misers’ (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). The following section brings to light the heuristics people employ when establishing the relevancy of existing knowledge structures to the cognitive task/s they are simultaneously engaged in. 4.7 The Function of Heuristics Tversky and Kahneman (1974) identified three types of heuristics that are likely to be used when arriving at a decision where several possibly relevant variables are concerned. The representativeness heuristic is the selection of whatever subset of all available information seems most representative of the problem at hand. The availability heuristic states that information that is easily accessed in memory plays a prominent function in forming conclusions — the more remote the analogy, the less likely it is to be retrieved from memory. This suggests that one reason why acts of creativity (involving analogies) are rare is that most people experience


79

difficulty recovering the potentially relevant experiences from memory. The final heuristic identified is that of anchoring and adjustment. This holds that we arrive at a judgement by focusing first upon some initial stance or value, and then making minor adjustments to fine-tune it to the current circumstances. The work of Tversky and Kahnemann (1974) demonstrates the means by which individuals reduce the demands placed on their cognitive system when acquiring or utilising knowledge. In organising and assigning personal relevance, or meaning to information, individuals tend to connect the information to the most active assemblage of associated networks available to them at that time. These processes relate to what Gestaltists have called ‘field’ processes, which makes performance (perception, imagery, thinking, language, etc.) minimally complex while remaining maximally adaptive (Köhler, 1947).

This works in

conjunction with the principle of schematic overdetermination of performance (SOP) (Anderson, 1995a).

The SOP principle states that performance at any time is

synthesised by the most active cluster of compatible schemata available in the brain’s field of activation when responding. Where cognitive ‘shortcuts’ are used to reduce effort and the output response is less appropriate than that which greater effort would have achieved, it could be said that the network has brought about premature closure in order to reach a resolution, or state of ‘relaxation’. The purpose of what has been presented thus far is to acquaint the reader with the complexities that are associated with the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge in individuals so as to establish a framework for the analysis of this process in a collaborative research setting. Connectionist network theory was used to describe the cognitive structures that facilitate the organisation of, and attribution of meaning to information as individuals acquire knowledge, and the way in which existing


80

knowledge structures are activated and brought into a problem space. Further to this, connectionist networks are of value to describe how information is incorporated into existing knowledge structures through assimilation, accommodation or through complete restructuring. It has been shown how this process is complicated by the cognitive structures that are mobilised prior to information being received, affective states, the limitations of the working memory, and the heuristics that are engaged in to reduce cognitive demand. It should now be apparent to the reader why the process of knowledge acquisition is not analogous to the engineering model that either explicitly or covertly underlies collaborative research projects. The assumptions that underpin collaborative research settings are thought to be naïve, since they fail to acknowledge the cognitive complexities that have been brought to light in this discussion. A further issue to discuss is that of creativity. What determines whether individuals approach existing knowledge structures in a ‘creative’ or ‘straight’ fashion in its application to cognitive tasks? The human leaning toward mental economy provides some insight into the emergence of creative thought and its role in knowledge acquisition and utilisation. 4.8 The Role of Creativity in Knowledge Acquisition. In an attempt to explain creativity, it has been suggested that individuals use prior experiences, which are indirectly applicable, by analogy (Koestler, 1964). Koestler (1964) proposed that creativity often results from the comparison of two sets of very different ideas, and that the deep analogies between these sets of ideas form the basis for solutions to unfamiliar problems. This analogical thinking is the result of processes that map the conceptual structure of one schematic network (referred to as the source domain) into another schematic network (called the target


81

domain) (Hall, 1986). Whilst this is referred to as analogical mapping (Holyoak, 1985; Holyoak & Thagard, 1989), it is conceptually similar to the notion of cross mapping. Analogical mapping is characterised as follows: Certain aspects of the base domain and target domains are matched. Elements of the base domain (usually relational) are transferred into the target domain to create some new conceptual structure.

There is a tendency for coherent, integrated pieces, rather than

fragmentary pieces of knowledge to be transferred from one network to another. Finally, elements may be transferred across networks if viewed as being functionally important or goal-consistent in some way (Holyoak, 1985; Holyoak & Thagard, 1989). This generation of creative ideas through the novel combination of familiar ideas is referred to as improbabilistic creativity (Boden, 1997), but does not explain the generation of ideas that simply could not have occurred before. This is referred to as impossibilistic creativity (Boden, 1997).

This can be explained through

connectionism in so much that if an aspect of a conceptual space is transformed (though mapping and exploration), then ideas can originate in a way that would not have previously been possible. They are related to the unaltered conceptual space and so are potentially intelligible, while at the same time, lying outside it (Boden, 1997). Thus, creative thought is not dependant on, nor limited to, the successful retrieval of potentially relevant experiences from memory (Sternberg, 1988). Creativity is, however, bounded by the capacity of working memory, heuristics employed to reduce cognitive demands, and the personal characteristics that would predispose a person to engage them. Characteristically, creative individuals exhibit deviations among their thoughts (called ‘divergent thinking’) (Cropley, 1997), lack of cognitive inhibition


82

(Eysenck, 1997), tolerance to ambiguity (Vernon, 1970), a willingness to overcome obstacles (Sternberg, 1988), and a preparedness to take risks (McClelland, 1963). These are all qualities that indicate a willingness to engage in more complex and demanding thought processes and a disinclination to engage in heuristics in order to reduce the cognitive workload. Accordingly, creativity may be seen as a function of the depth of cognitive processing an individual will employ in the acquisition of knowledge. This notion leads to a similar yet fundamentally different perspective to come from sociologists of science.

To deepen the reader’s current level of

understanding, it is necessary to introduce additional complexities from the sociology of science. 4.9 Scientific Knowledge as a Process of Construction Products of science (or knowledge production) are contextually specific constructions that bear the mark of the situational contingency and interest structure of the process by which they are generated (Knorr-Cetina, 1980).

To fully

understand this process requires an analysis of their construction. This means that what occurs in the process of construction is not irrelevant to the products obtained and further infers a form of internal structure through the process of knowledge production.

The process involves chains of decisions and negotiations through

which outcomes are derived. Expressed simply, selections are required. Thus, knowledge production can be seen as structured in terms of levels of selectivity. This selectivity embodied in the products of science is linked to a social process of negotiation situated in time and space rather than to a logic of individual decision making. Further to this, Knorr-Cetina (1980) suggests there is a conversion process that takes place in the transition of these selections from laboratory to output. The delivery of scientific objects is marked by local, contextual and socially


83

situated breeds of action. Therefore, the process of conversion can be viewed as a “mechanism of social connection — mediated by the fission and fusion of interests which operates in transscientific fields” (Knorr-Cetina, 1980, p. 152). It is a process in which scientific objects are continuously reconstructed from a preceding object, while their equivalence to or difference from these preceding objects is simultaneously negotiated. Knorr-Cetina (1980) suggests this is an economy of change, rather than exchange. The degree to which disequivilance occurs during reconstruction determines the level of conversion or perversion of these scientific objects. While it is heuristically useful to consider the stages of knowledge from creation to eventual utilisation as essentially linear, this sociological perspective reinforces the suggestion that it is a substantially more complex and dynamic process. For example, actions are underdetermined by existing knowledge which is the impetus to new knowledge (Knorr-Cetina, 1981).

Further, in the case of

diffusion, it can be suggested that as new knowledge meets existing knowledge, not only does knowledge complete with knowledge, but a form of reasoning also occurs. This reasoning involves extensive deductive arguments, particularly aimed at the clarification of the meaning of concepts. In Hegelian terms, the development of contradictions and their solutions evolve as a means of elucidation, which often results as a synthesis of these opposing processes. This sociological perspective recognises knowledge as being developed in a cultural context, with political, social, economic and ideological dimensions that exert continual forces on both the substance and process of knowledge creation (Ayer, 1956). This chapter has explored the process of knowledge acquisition at an individual level and by drawing on the fields of sociology, cognitive and social


84

psychology, demonstrated quite clearly the complexities associated with this process. This is particularly the case where an individual restructures existing knowledge structures or frames of reference in order to understand their environment. The contributions from the aforementioned bodies of research have shown that the assumptions underlying tri-lateral arrangements of scientific investigation are disingenuous premises, since they fail to acknowledge the complexities inherent to the acquisition and utilisation of individual knowledge in such settings. Furthermore, it is suggested that due to the interrelatedness of these factors, it is not possible to approach them in isolation. That is, the acknowledgement of one of these influences in the absence of another is not sufficient — they must be approached in unison. Consequently, the influences on the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge in individuals will serve to inform the analysis of this research project. At this point, it is salient to note that the social, cognitive, and affective influences mentioned in this chapter are extrapolated when individuals come together as groups. Building on the arguments outlined in the this chapter, the following chapter focuses on the emergent phenomena associated with social, cognitive and affective factors in group knowledge acquisition and utilisation.


85

CHAPTER FIVE Group Knowledge Acquisition

This chapter continues to build on the reader’s understanding of the dynamic relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in cooperative research settings by introducing the emergent phenomena associated with group learning in such settings.

The evidence presented will show how the social,

cognitive and affective influences seen at an individual level, intensify when individuals come together as groups.

Although the importance of relationship

building and the subsequent formation of trust are acknowledged (Fulop, 2002; Powell, 1990, 1996; Ring, 1997), it is also shown that trust develops as a function of other conditions being met. The aforementioned issues will be discussed in relation to the underlying philosophies and assumptions of collaborative research arrangements and, again, this will show why these are inappropriate tenets if organisational application of research arising through these arrangements is to be maximised. Additionally, it will be shown how the material presented in this chapter will serve to inform the theory to be used in the analysis of this research project. Although the term ‘group learning’ has come into widespread usage among managers and scholars alike (Skyrme, 1999), its popularity contradicts the fact that the process by which knowledge is created, diffused and utilised in groups has remained poorly understood (Brief & Walsh, 1999). Recent contributions to this field (Argote, 1999; Argote et al., 2001; Harinck et al., 2000; McElroy, 2000; Rowley, 2000b; Thagard et al., in press; Thompson, Levine, et al., 1999) have looked to group composition, group size, familiarity among group members and communication processes in an attempt to solve this quandary. The findings of these


86

studies are drawn on throughout this chapter. Additionally, since socialisation processes are pivotal to the means by and extent to which groups acquire and utilise knowledge, the role of emotion, and its subsequent impact on these processes are discussed. Dissemination techniques are reviewed and it is shown how in collaborative Visioning projects, dissemination actually becomes a process of ‘double theory’ transmission, and the difficulties associated with this are brought to bear. For the purpose of this thesis, groups are defined as a collection of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, who see themselves and are seen by others as an intact social entity, and who are embedded in a larger social system (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996). This definition is representative of those who would be involved in a collaborative Visioning project and the subsequent formulation of policy. The first section of this chapter examines the ways in which individuals might acquire knowledge is affected by the presence of others. 5.1 Social Processes It is widely accepted that individuals behave differently when in the presence of others. Research has found that when others are present, an individual’s level of arousal is increased (Zajonc, 1965). In other words, in the presence of others, individuals are more aware of their environment and what is occurring within it. With increased awareness, individuals tend to perform better at tasks that are well learned or simple. Conversely, when completing a difficult or new task, performance levels decrease. This phenomenon is called social facilitation (Zajonc, 1965), and individual effort is extended in the presence of others as they try to form impressions in the minds of others and construct their own social identity. Social influence, on the other hand, refers to the exercise of social power by a person or group to change the attitudes or behaviour of others in a particular


87

direction (Jones & Ince, 2001; Raven, 1992; Turner, 1991). This concept can extend to the point where decision making is ultimately an individual event, but is socially constructed as it evolves through a group setting (McKnight & Sutton, 1994). It is in socialisation that we begin to see the fusing of social needs into personal needs, the synchronisation of subjective reality with objective reality (Levine & Moreland, 1999).

Research has shown that people consciously and

unconsciously process their experiences in accordance with pre-existing views (theories-in-use) of reality (March, 1999).

Because these views are unique to

individual social histories, each person interprets reality in a distinct way and responds differently to events (Turner, 1982). Moreover, a person's reactions to a given event may differ over time, depending on which views are elicited and become dominant in response to that event (Forgas, 2000a). Given the extreme malleability of the human organism, social systems can create a vast spectrum of selves that we portray to others, relative to the situation (Turner, 1982, 1985, 1991). Socialisation is the acquisition of shared attitudes, values, and behavioural norms, and a mechanism for transmitting culture through which a common orientation develops. This helps to smooth idiosyncrasies due to individual characteristics and leaves the group to focus more on the task at hand, rather than the individual differences that occur within groups (Levine & Moreland, 1999). From this, it is apparent that socialisation is a process that involves double-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1974, 1996). That is, individuals alter their values, attitudes and beliefs (their theories-inuse) so that they align with those of the group. When people are involved in an ambiguous social event (e.g., disparate individuals coming together in a collaborative setting), the social beliefs that come to mind at that moment will influence how they interpret the event (Forgas, 2000b).


88

Subtle features of a situation or experience, such as a single word or picture, can ‘prime’ or activate one set of stored social beliefs more than others. Once activated, these beliefs can remain readily available for several minutes for the person to use in interpreting and responding to new social events. In other words, social perception is influenced by which beliefs or interpretive biases have been recently activated and made accessible.

Therefore, individuals creatively shape reality through social

interaction, the outcome of which is dependant on the degree to which individual values, attitudes, and beliefs coalesce among group members (Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Forgas & George, in press; Gigone & Hastie, 1993; Kruglanski, 1988; Levine, Bogart, & Zdaniuk, 1996; Murphy & Zajonic, 1993; Parkinson & Manstead, 1992; Turner, 1985). The preceding discussion begins to reveal how the complexities of individual knowledge acquisition are further complicated in group situations. The next section of this chapter explores the notion of group knowledge as well as how groups are ‘primed’ prior to receiving new information. This is discussed in relation to the ways in which individuals share information among group members and the factors that would aid or impair such sharing. 5.2 Priming in Groups A particular concern of this chapter is the processes that underlie the acquisition of knowledge through the elicitation or sharing of knowledge that group members may already possess, or through the generation of new or ‘emergent’ knowledge through collaboration and interaction. The term ‘emergent’ refers to knowledge that no individual member of the group possessed prior to group interaction or discussion, but surfaces throughout the course of the interaction (Argote, 1999).


89

The process of knowledge acquisition in groups begins with schematic priming. Individuals will come to a meeting or face-to-face discussion primed (J. R. Anderson, 1996), the combination and dynamics of which ‘set the tone’, or prime the group (Gigone & Hastie, 1993). The socialisation process of group members, and the past experiences and outcomes of the group may all be seen as priming (Higgins, 1989; McKnight & Sutton, 1994), since this is how theories-in-use or frames of reference evolve. Similar to that at an individual level, associative networks in group members are then mobilised in order to prepare the collective for cognitive functioning (Levine et al., 1996). In this framework, incoming information is represented as the sharing of knowledge held by individuals with other group members as information relevant to decision making or policy formulation is presented. Possession of knowledge is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for sharing it with others in the group (Stasser, 1999; Stasser & Titus, 1987). The individual must recall the knowledge, perceive it as relevant, and be motivated to share it (Argote, 1999). Once shared, the knowledge held by individual members of the group is referred to as information. This is becasue because knowledge for one, remains information to another, until it is instilled with relevance and meaning. The sharing of information by one group member then initiates a search for relevant knowledge associations among other members as they attempt to organise and imbue it with meaning. The extent to which this search takes place and, in turn, encourages the generation of original, creative thought, is largely dependent upon the social-psychological dynamics that occur in group settings. These dynamics further illustrate how the complexities associated with individual knowledge acquisition are amplified at a group level.


90

5.3 The Role of Creativity in Group Knowledge Acquisition. Emergent knowledge (i.e., knowledge that no member possessed prior to the group discussion), evolves through group discussion and interaction (Argote, 1999). This can occur when a comment offered by one member stimulates another to form a new idea or when disparate views of members lead to the development of an alternative by another member that resolves the differing viewpoints.

This

‘evolutionary’ process of knowledge development is analogous to the concept of décalage (Piaget, 1956) introduced in the previous chapter. Certain repetitions of knowledge, which on some occasions resemble returns to the existing structures, may be seen in the acquisition of new knowledge. The way in which a group determines where new knowledge, shared or emergent, relates to existing knowledge structures is largely dependent on the creativity or divergence of ideas they demonstrate. Furthermore, the likelihood of new knowledge emerging through group interaction is proportional to the amount of unique knowledge held by individual members that is shared with other members (Argote, 1999; Argote et al., 2001; Skyrme, 1999). Although creativity in group decision processes is largely dependent upon the sharing of divergent thought, research shows that groups often make use of convergent thinking in order to bring closure to decision making (reducing the cognitive workload), before having engaged in sufficient divergent thinking to consider more creative alternatives (Scheidel & Crowell, 1979). Divergent thinking is stimulated by the presentation of conflicting minority views during group discussion. Studies have shown that groups which reflect on alternative solutions presented by a minority formulate more alternative solutions, produce more creative and original arguments, and perform at a higher level than groups lacking a minority position (Argote, 1999; Argote et al., 2001). Therefore, an


91

obvious means to obtain differing viewpoints is to maintain diversity in the composition of the group members (Belbin, 1993b, 1997). Since participants in cooperative research projects, such as collaborative Visioning projects, are said to represent a cross-section of stakeholders representative of the community in question, it is suggested that there should be sufficient diversity among members to facilitate the generation of creative and original alternatives that would guide the community towards a desirable and sustainable future. Research shows, however, that diversity of group members is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for groups to generate original and novel thought. 5.4 Group Composition and Creativity While several studies indicate heterogeneous groups tend to display more creativity (Argote, 1982; Belbin, 1993a), particularly in complex tasks (Wood et al., 2001), evidence of the relationship between heterogeneous groups and group performance is contradictory (Jackson, May, & Whitney, 1995; Williams & O'Reilly, 1998), but would seem at best, curvilinear. The non-monotonic inverted U-shaped relationship suggests that heterogeneous groups tend to be more creative and perform better than homogenous groups to a point, but then this decreases as excessive diversity becomes disruptive (Halme, 2001). Williams and O’Reilly (1998) found group performance differed as a function of the dimension of diversity. Functional diversity (i.e., diversity in backgrounds) generally had a positive effect on group performance. Halme (2001) suggests, “members should be as diverse as necessary and as similar as possible” (p. 112). In this instance, diversity among members leads to constructive conflict (Leonard & Strauss, 1997), while minimising the costs that can be associated with communication in diverse groups (Argote, 1999). The incidence of conflict, combined with an absence of intimidation to


92

conformity, has been found to increase ‘integrative complexity’ (Gruenfeld & Hollingshead, 1993; Tetlock, 1986). Integrative complexity is defined by a group’s ability to recognise and discriminate between multiple dimensions of an issue, and to identify and integrate associations among those dimensions. In combination, these findings suggest emergent knowledge is likely to evolve in groups where, (1) there is some diversity in opinion among group members; (2) group norms favour learning rather than grasping the ‘best’ or ‘fastest’ solution; and, (3) where groups have time to learn to interact effectively and develop appropriate task performance strategies (Argote, 1999; Gruenfeld & Hollingshead, 1993).

Regardless of the level of

diversity, the prevailing tendency is for group members to share ideas that they already have in common rather than present ideas that are unique to individual members (Gigone & Hastie, 1993; Larson et al., 1998; Larson et al., 1994; Stasser et al., 1989). Alternative findings argue that the sharing of commonalties among members is a function of meeting duration (Larson et al., 1996). Common thoughts may be over-represented in the early phases of discussions but, if discussion continued sufficiently long, unique contributions would become increasingly likely to surface. This suggests that the sharing of common knowledge may be more characteristic of short than of long meetings (Larson et al., 1998; Larson et al., 1996). For others, it is a function of the number of members holding the same knowledge prior to discussion (Gigone & Hastie, 1993, 1996), the advantage of repetition in discussion (Stasser et al., 1989), or the social validation shared knowledge engenders by being held in common (Hinsz, 1990; Stasser, 1999). The additional time group members interact with each other in longer meetings would additionally serve to establish social validation of members through the development of relationships among them. In


93

turn, the increased levels of trust that emerge through relationship building (Fulop, 2002; Ring, 1997) would increase the likelihood of sharing novel ideas. This would suggest that in collaborative settings, stakeholder meetings should be of sufficient duration to activate relationships, develop the trust that would facilitate the sharing of novel ideas, and minimise the circulation of knowledge already held in common. In isolation, the issue of interaction/meeting duration drastically oversimplifies the dynamics inherent in building relationships among group members. The treatment of new information is dependent not only on the factors mentioned thus far, but also upon social contingencies (including political factors) (Allison, 1971; McKnight & Sutton, 1994; Pfeffer, 1981; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993; Putman & Mumby, 1993), and decision making experience of group members (Gruenfeld & Hollingshead, 1993; Hardiman et al., 1989). Although groups organise information and establish relevance or meaning to it through the sharing of information, they often fail to generate novel and original thought. The following section presents research findings that offer explanations of why this is so. The interrelatedness of the theories presented and the establishment of relationships among group members are discussed in relation to the generation of novel thought by groups. Throughout this section of the chapter, the role of affect on group knowledge acquisition and utilisation is noted. 5.6 Groups as ‘Cognitive Misers’ An alternative explanation (Janis, 1982) for dominance of common knowledge in groups is that novel information may be threatening.

This is

particularly so when members sense that they are progressing toward a mutually valued goal and fear that new information may encumber their progress (Stasser, 1999). Janis (1982) concluded that poorer decision choices result from groups that


94

value consensus than groups whose members dispute options and values and are open to contentious evaluation of decision alternatives. He argued that groups which hold concordance in esteem tend to suppress the input of information or values that are contradictory to dominant preferences. The desire to conform prevents people from expressing critical or novel ideas and in such a group, amiability and morale take precedence over judgement. The outcome is that members seem more willing to act at the expense of non-members and critical, independent thinking is replaced by what Janis (1982) refered to as ‘groupthink’. A related phenomenon called ‘group polarization’ refers to the tendency of groups to develop positions and attitudes that are more extreme than those held by individual group members before participating in group discussion (Lamm, 1988; Lamm & Myers, 1978). Groups that start out with a risky bias are likely to become more so during discussion; groups that start with a conservative bias are likely to become more conservative. In part, polarization occurs as group members deliberate because they discover that other group members share their views to a greater extent than was originally thought. In an effort to be seen positively by other constituents, some members become strong advocates for what appears to be the dominant sentiment of the group. Initially, popular positions among group members are those that attract the most persuasive argument. This serves to elaborate information and justifications to support the arguments’ biases. This process works to intensify the popularity of these shared attitudes, so that the group as a whole becomes extreme in its position. Another phenomenon that occurs in groups is referred to as ‘social loafing’ (Karau & Williams, 1993).

This theory states that as a group gets larger, the

individual contribution decreases disproportionate to the group size. This is due to


95

the diffusion of responsibility created as the size of the group increases and the tendency of individuals to ‘free-ride’ on the efforts of others. The factors mentioned thus far suggest the tendency individuals display toward mental economy is complicated further at a group level as group members organise and attach meaning to information. This occurs as a function of the social contingencies that become manifest when individuals come together as a group. 5.8 Social Contingencies in Group Knowledge Acquisition Much of the evidence presented suggests that group composition is an important factor in its eventual performance, and this is reflected in the extant literature. Common sense dictates that no matter how appealing the strategy may be, it is not always practical or possible to alter the composition of a work group. In collaborative Visioning projects, stakeholders are often invited to participate on the basis of their community representation.

Consequently, in achieving adequate

representation of interest groups, the composition of the group may be less than ideal in terms of decision making outcomes. However, if stakeholders are selected to represent particular groups so that they might accurately mirror the interests of that group, then it is not possible to alter the composition of group membership to facilitate group decision making outcomes. In such instances, it is suggested that making better use of the talents and characteristics that group members already possess is a more realistic and functional strategy (Hackman & Morris, 1975). Group performance is potentially improved when members learn more about one another so that they might make better use of the human resources within the group (Moreland, 1999). When each group member possess a shared awareness of each other’s abilities, they are then able to plan and coordinate their work more effectively. This


96

is because tasks are assigned to those who would perform them best and members are able to anticipate rather than simply react to each other’s behaviour (Murnighan & Conlon, 1991). As group members spend more time together in similar situations, they become familiar with each other. The strengths and weaknesses of group members are acknowledged and then considered as members learn to work more productively together. Familiarity often fortifies group cohesion, which can lead to improved group performance (Mullen & Cooper, 1994). While familiarity may sometimes encumber more than enhance group performance (Kim, 1997; Leedom & Simon, 1995), the majority of research suggests that groups perform better as members become more familiar with each other (Moreland, 1999). As trust develops as group members learn more about each other (Kramer, Newton, & Pommerenke, 1993), the uncertainties held toward other members, where the affective states of distrust, suspicion, threat and fear originate, diminish. Therefore, when collaborative projects bring together individuals (who are often rival) in situations where they are asked to cooperate, not compete, it is the skilful management of these affective4 states that has a profound effect on the overall outcome and effectiveness of the project. 5.9 The Role of Affect in Group Knowledge Acquisition Similar to that at an individual level, the traditional analysis of decision making in groups is based on the information-processing model, which sees decisions resulting from rational analysis (March, 1988b). Since it was shown in the 4

The term ‘affect’ is commonly used to encompass a variety of experiences such as emotions, moods and preferences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000; Fiske & Taylor, 1991). For the purpose of this paper, the term ‘emotion’ shall be used to refer to fairly brief but intense experiences that have a more specific focus (Forgas, 1995), whereas ‘mood’ shall refer to low-intensity but more prolonged experiences (Eysenck & Keane, 2000). Although all three terms (emotion, mood and affect) will be used throughout this thesis, affect will be used in a broad sense to refer to the entire constellation of emotion and feeling states that are experienced by individuals.


97

previous chapter that affect and cognition are mutually influential at an individual level, it stands to reason that affect is more pervasive in group decision tasks than the amount of available literature would suggest. As at an individual level, the role of affect in organisational settings has received more attention in recent years (Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000; Barsade, 2001; Dulewicz & Higgs, 2000; Forgas, 2000a, 2000b; Hertel, Nuehof, Theuer, & Kerr, 2000; Leary, 2000; Palmer, Walls, Burgess, & Stough, 2001; Schwarz, 2000; Zeelenberg, van Dijk, Manstead, & van der Pligt, 2000), including the role of affect in negotiation (Thompson, Nadler, & Kim, 1999). If knowledge acquisition in individuals can be viewed as a series of decisions and negotiations as suggested in Chapter Four, then it is appropriate to contend that groups also engage in a succession of decisions and negotiations in the acquisition of knowledge. Prescriptive models of how best to engage in negotiation frequently maintain that negotiators should focus on cognitive, rational decision making processes in order to rise above the influence of affect in their decision outcomes (Harinck et al., 2000). This stance fails to acknowledge the positive effects of this fundamental aspect of human interaction, and sees demonstrations of affect in negotiations as a negative event or a weakness (Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993). Recently, Thompson, Nadler and Kim (1999) proposed a different approach to the role of affect in negotiation through the following propositions. First, they acknowledge that affect plays a large role in the decision making process of groups. Second, they suggest that affect is not always reducible to the individual level, but that it is meaningful at the group and organisational level. Finally, they state that the emotionally ‘skilled’ negotiator manages emotional experience and emotional expression in order to maximise outcomes for all concerned. There are several ways in which emotions


98

become manifest at a group level. Individuals come together primed for group interaction (N. H. Anderson, 1996; Gigone & Hastie, 1996), but not only do previous interactions, expectations or the socialisation process of group members prime the group, but members also bring to the group the affect associated with those cognitions (Power & Dalgleish, 1997). Additionally, an individual may bring affect to the group from a previous, unrelated experience (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). While group members may try to disengage themselves from the thoughts and feelings associated with an earlier event, research has shown that the thoughts themselves may subside, but the associated emotions often intensify in the attempt to suppress them (Wegner & Bargh, 1998). This is referred to as exogenous emotion (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999) and can have either a positive or negative impact on the group decision outcome. Positive-mood negotiators have been shown to achieve superior outcomes in both individual (Kramer et al., 1993) and collective terms (Carnevale & Isen, 1986), rate themselves as more trusting of others involved in the process (Kramer et al., 1993), propose more alternatives, make more requests for the reactions of others, and concede more on some items in order to profit on others (Carnevale & Isen, 1986). Additionally, positive-mood individuals exchange more information and are more apt to recognise integrative solutions than those in negative moods (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). Given these findings, it is not surprising that positive affect has been linked to creative thinking (Forgas & George, in press), flexible thinking (Cropley, 1997), and more motivated thinking (Sternberg, 1988). Conversely, negative affect has a detrimental effect on the quality of group outcomes (Barsade, 2001). Group members who feel high anger and low empathy toward other group members are less apt to accurately assess the interests of others


99

and achieve lesser collective gain than those who are low in anger and high in empathy (Allred, Mallozzi, Matsui, & Raia, 1997). Negative emotions that result from discordant relationships impair effective negotiation as those with an acrimonious history focus more on their individual outcomes than do those with a congruous or neutral history (Loewenstein, 1996; Loewenstein, Thompson, & Bazerman, 1989). Thus, exogenous emotions are, fundamentally, a personal reaction brought to bear within a group. Emotions, however, have primarily relational rather than personal meanings, which means emotions relate to an event or experience that most frequently, involve others. This is what constitutes a dyad or group as a system (Parkinson, 1995). From this perspective, feeling emotional is not just a personal reaction, but it involves declarations about one’s identity relative to others, or classification of the social situation (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999) and is referred to as endogenous emotion or emotional contagion. In spite of early attention that was not able to sustain research effort (Sharaf, 1983; Reich, 1973), how affect operates and influences groups of people has only recently been of interest to organisational and psychological researchers (Barsade, 2001). Increasingly, the concept of emotional contagion, “a process in which a person or group influences the emotions or behavior [sic] of another person or group through the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states or behavioral [sic] attitudes” (Schoenewolf, 1990, p. 50), has been the subject of investigation. 5.10 Emotional Contagion Barsade (2001) refers to emotional contagion as “the ripple effect” (p. 48) whereby the moods and emotions that group members experience ripple out and influence the moods and emotions of not only other group members, but group


100

dynamics and individual cognitions, attitudes, and behaviours. Emotional contagion can occur either in or outside of conscious awareness (Schoenewolf, 1990), but at an unconscious level manifests itself over three stages (Barsade, 2001; Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). Psychological researchers have found that the first step of this process involves the process of people unconsciously mimicking the facial expressions of others (Lundqvist & Dimberg, 1995), their body language (Chartrand & Bargh, 1999), speech patterns (Eckman, Friesen, & Scherer, 1976), and verbal tones (Neumann & Strack, 2000; Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). The second part of the process is where the individual then experiences the emotion itself by inferring how they are feeling from their muscular, visceral, and glandular responses that result from the mimicking of others (Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapsen, 1992). The third and final process is the actual contagion process — catching the mood from others. Although it is generally thought that emotions originate from within an individual, the research shows that it can also originate externally (i.e., seeing someone smile makes another smile, which then makes that other person feel happy). Emotional contagion has also been shown to occur at a conscious level through social comparison processes in which people look around, compare their affective moods to those of others in their environment, and then respond accordingly (Bendelow & Williams, 1998; McKnight & Sutton, 1994; Mitchell, 1969). Just as emotions can be experienced, they can also be expressed. It is a widespread belief that effective management of emotions and moods equates affective numbness, or purely objective thinking. However, emotion and mood management has as much to do with knowing when and how to express the affect as it does with controlling in order to contribute positively to group decision outcomes (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). Socially adept people are able to emotionally


101

‘tune’ to others by considering the affective state of their audience and then tailoring their messages so as to regulate the audience’s affective responses, thereby achieving social interaction goals. The literature tends to accentuate the benefits to group performance outcomes when positive affect is present, and stresses that what is perceived to be a negative mood should be alleviated if maximum capabilities of the group members are realised (Argote, Gruenfeld, & Naquin, 2001; Argote, 1999; Barsade, 2001). This is reinforced in the findings of a study that showed team dynamics were affected negatively by affective diversity (Barsade, Ward, Turner, & Sonnenfeld, 2000). However, it is suggested that a positive mood can impair group performance if the intensity of emotion extends to the point where it interferes with participants’ goals (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Further, it should be noted that a negative emotion could enhance a group’s outcomes if it is used as a means to communicate to others the importance of an issue (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999) or to resolve conflicting meanings, and is expressed in a fashion that does not threaten, humiliate, or intimidate others (Brown, 1968; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993; Rogers, 1993). Awareness and resolution of conflicting meanings will also provide insight as to individual agendas, values and belief systems (Carnevale & Isen, 1986; Harinck et al., 2000; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993), all of which support one’s frame of reference (March, 1999). Emotion expressed with sensitivity to the emotional needs and states of others facilitates the development of trust among group members. Subsequently, this breaks down the aforementioned barriers that prevent the sharing of novel and original thoughts (Kramer, 1999). Although expressed differently, understanding of this notion is enhanced when viewed from a sociological perspective. This alludes to


102

the inter-subjective, social character of the world by first establishing how individuals develop the contexts in which they interact. Augier, Sharig, and Vendele (2001) suggest that context is an individual construct that emerges as one encounters a situation which may include others and artefacts. It is the individual interpretation of a situation that results in context. Context then undergoes constant metamorphosis as a result of the action of the individual and their interaction with others involved.

Since it is individual

interpretation of a situation that results in context, it is implied that the context that emerges for an individual in a specific situation is based on previous experiences. Therefore, as two individuals will interpret situations differently, no two emerging contexts will ever be identical.

There does exist, however, the possibility of

developing commonalties among actors, but the possibility exists within a continuum polarised by intimacy and anonymity. Schuetz (1967) describes social relations as being one of three types: they relations, thou relations and we relations. In we relations individuals are aware of each other and of the awareness, and are able to develop an understanding of each others’ motives. In thou relations, no such reciprocity of understanding exists and understanding involves more “anonymous types of meaning” (Augier, Sharig, & Vendele, 2001), p. 130). They relations use “statements of general validity” (Schuetz, 1962, p. 18) in order to assign ‘typical’ motives to each other and thereby understand each others’ behaviours. Through this typology, we relations facilitate the conditions for intimacies to develop through shared commonalties. An individual’s stock of knowledge is constantly transformed and modified as they accumulate specialised knowledge about the other. It is the sharing of experiences as described in we relations that gives the world its inter subjective, social character. As Schuetz (1964) explains, “it is not my environment


103

nor your environment nor even the two added; it is an inter-subjective world within reach of our common experience” (p. 31). Rearticulated, this notion of context is essentially an individual’s frame of reference.

The most likely conditions for

knowledge transfer to take place is not necessarily through the establishment of social relationships, but through the interconnectivity of individual contexts that transpires through mutual understanding (Schuetz, 1964). The argument developed thus far suggests that affect should not necessarily be viewed as negative, but acknowledged as an underlying influence that, depending on how it is managed, may enhance or impair the acquisition of knowledge in groups as members engage with each other in cognitive negotiations.

Furthermore, it

indicates the extent to which socialisation processes, including relationship building, are underpinned by affect. It is important to acknowledge this since this implies the success of a collaborative Visioning project would hinge upon the successful amalgamation of disparate individuals coming together pursuant to a common goal. Although the importance of emotional tuning among group members has been discussed, the issue of establishing mutual understanding through cognitive ‘tuning’ in the dissemination of information to groups has yet to be addressed. It is the point to which this discussion now turns. 5.11 Knowledge Dissemination The Oxford dictionary defines dissemination as ‘to spread as though throwing a seed’. This definition infers more than a random diffusion of ideas, but rather, a deliberate act to accomplish a purpose or, the transfer of knowledge from those who have it to those who do not. The most basic argument for establishing dissemination programs (also referred to as knowledge diffusion) is that knowledge is out there, yet it remains unknown in many specific areas where it could be put to good use


104

(McCarthy & Kuh, 1980). Rules of reverence would suggest that knowledge, as it exists, must be appropriate according to the special time and place of each circumstance. The task then becomes one of determining what types of transfers are worthwhile under varying conditions.

From this stance, diffusion then also becomes an issue of

‘quality control’ (Knott & Wildavsky, 1980). At each stage of utilisation there is a different need for information (Backer, 1993). Premature diffusion runs the risk of creating a growing cynicism before it can be adopted, and a worthwhile innovation/piece of knowledge may first have to overcome the cynicism generated by an earlier, less fortunate disclosure (Goldberg, 1997). Distinguishing between opportune and premature diffusion should reduce the amount of ignorance masquerading as knowledge (Stocking, 1998), as should the marrying of the demands of the senders to the capabilities of the receivers (Caws, 1998). This point is directly relevant to the current study. In Chapter Two, it was noted that collaborative Visioning projects are generally underpinned by an ‘audit’ process involving an integrated series of research projects aimed at overviewing the current status of region, city or town in question in terms of social, economic and environmental considerations.

Upon this foundation, stakeholders develop a

preferred vision for the future to guide strategic planning and/or marketing. Therefore, the accuracy of the strategic plans is dependent on an acute understanding of the current status of the destination. This highlights the importance of appropriate dissemination techniques and the accordant onus of responsibility that rests with the researchers and/or mediating agencies, such as a CRC, in disseminating that information to would be users. To further complicate this issue, Chapter Two also revealed the ‘cultural


105

divide’ between academia and industry, and the fact that most of what each does remains enigmatic to the other (House Committee on Science, 1998; Sokal & Bricmont, 1998). Indeed, one of the objectives of the CRCST is to deliver research pertinent to the needs of industry “without academic mystery” (CRCST, 1999, p. 3). This challenge is of sufficient significance to have been mentioned in Australian science policy on more than one occasion (Batterham, 2000; DETYA, 2000; DIST, 1995; PMSEIC, 1999a, 1999b), although it should be noted that the challenge is not unique to Australia (House Committee on Science, 1998; Industry Canada, 1997). This cultural divide between researchers and industry participants suggests that the theories-in-use by each party are so misaligned that they are unable to reach common understanding. This is because researchers possess strong procedural knowledge skills, whereas industry participants have a rich understanding of the contextual knowledge that often remains largely unknown to the researcher. The absence of ‘double theoretical transmission’ whereby disparate frames of reference merge, means that research findings remain a source of information, not products of knowledge. Currently, the preferred dissemination technique by researchers employs a single-loop learning strategy referred to as the ‘student-teacher’ paradigm (Halme, 2001). Although this seems to be the favoured vehicle through which to disseminate research outcomes, it fails to create feedback loops leading to two-way communication. One-way communication, at best, will result in accommodation of knowledge, and receptivity of network members is limited by the strength of the intent to learn (Halme, 2001). Maturana (1980) provides a salient description of what actually happens when knowledge appears to be ‘transferred’ from one person to another:


106

Objective knowledge seems possible and through objective knowledge the universe appears systematic and predictable. Yet knowledge as an experience is something personal and private that cannot be transferred, and that which one believes to be transferable, objective knowledge must always be created by the listener: the listener understands, and objective knowledge appears transferred, only if he [sic] is prepared to understand (p. 5).

Conversely, double-loop learning via practical exercises in workshop forums facilitates continual education and training experiences as both parties gain an appreciation of each other’s cognitive processes and further develop and extend their own. This results in what was referred to in Chapter Four as generative learning, or décalage, which requires the learner to reframe, develop new concepts and attitudes, cognitively re-label existing classifications and amend standards of judgment (Piaget, 1956; Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). For knowledge to be diffused, it is not sufficient to merely make it available; it is necessary to help the receiver consider the information and explore its relevance. Rather than not enough information and individuals needing more, diffusion techniques may also relate to an oversupply of information. If diffusion signifies merely making more data available, it is simultaneously successful and superfluous (Backer, 1993). There are already too many data (Rosen & Weil, 1997). Diffusion then becomes a tool to free policy and decision makers from the overwhelming influx of information. Here, diffusion depends on more than the mere provision of information — diffusion requires simplification, clarification and a focus on relevance to the audience (Dunphy & Griffiths, 1998). Disseminators then, may also


107

be seen as translators, interpreters and gatekeepers for decision makers. Diffusion is often viewed as a ‘change agent’ strategy and, therefore, becomes a mask for policy advocacy (Tisdell, 1981). Under the guise of spreading knowledge, disseminators may be tempted to initiate changes, which policymakers deem unnecessary. Rather than information about what might work and what could be done, diffusion becomes an effort to tell what should be done (Etzkowitz, 1996). For some, diffusion is nothing more than a synonym for the desire to have policymaking work better to solve public problems (LaFollette, 1998). If diffusion involves increasing the use of knowledge, achievement may be pictured as an obstacle course in which successive hurdles must be overcome in order to reach the finish line (Backer, 1993). By defining these hurdles and determining how they might be overcome, the current study will attempt to identify what specific strategies of diffusion are more (or less) likely to increase the use of knowledge to solve public problems. Although this chapter has detailed the many complexities that may enhance or impair group decision making, it is not always economically viable (in cognitive or pecuniary terms) to exhaust every possible solution from every possible alternative before a decision is made. However, as groups abbreviate the sharing of information, whether it be for cognitive or social reasons, there is always the risk of the decision making being brought to premature closure. In this instance, as Weiss (1980) suggested, knowledge creeps and decisions accrete into existence. Acknowledgement of these phenomena and their impact on eventual decision outcomes must surely increase in direct proportion to the implications of those decisions, such as those that would inform and shape policy to guide the future development of destination. A synthesis of the information presented in this chapter


108

identifies a series of antecedent conditions that would enhance group knowledge acquisition and subsequent decision making outcomes. First, group members should be heterogeneous (Jackson et al., 1995), be aware of the distribution of expertise within the group (Stewart & Stasser, 1995), not be overloaded with information (Stasser & Titus, 1987), recognise the leaders within the group (Larson et al., 1996), and have a diversity of views (Stasser & Titus, 1987). Second, meetings should be face-to-face (Nonaka, 1991) and of sufficient duration to get past the initial tendency to focus on information held in common (Larson et al., 1994). Finally, affect is an extant phenomenon, the presence of which should not be denied, but rather, managed so as to facilitate the development of relationship building, trust and mutual understanding.

Satisfying these conditions would

facilitate the realisation of composite membership benefits (i.e., the potential to acquire knowledge, shared or emergent, through the pooling of different ideas and viewpoints) (Argote & Ingram, 2000; Chalip, 2001). The aforementioned conditions have direct relevance to the current study. The CRCST acknowledge the incongruent frames of reference among collaborative research participants, and the challenge of knowledge transfer from academics to practitioners in a way that is congenial to practitioners. The emerging question to be investigated is, to what degree the systems in place within the CRCST occasion the appearance of these facilitating conditions? As with that at an individual level, these social, cognitive and affective influences cannot be viewed in isolation, one of these influences in the absence of another is not sufficient — they must be approached in unison. Accordingly, these interconnected influences serve to inform a model of decision making developed to inform the analysis of this investigation. At this point however, the contents of this and the previous chapter need to be


109

considered in organisational and inter-organisational contexts to fully appreciate the extent that additional social contingencies, namely political factors, impact upon the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge, and how this relates to organisational and inter-organisational learning. Collaborative Visioning projects create an organisation in their own right as participants come together to pursue a common goal. However, as participants come from different organisations, there exists the opportunity for inter-organisational learning. It is necessary to understand the emergent phenomena at this level to fully appreciate how these collaborative networks draw in scientific knowledge designed for organisational application. This is the focus of the following chapter.


110

CHAPTER SIX Knowledge Acquisition at Organisational and Inter-organisational Levels

The previous two chapters have integrated the literature relating to knowledge acquisition in individuals and groups in order to develop a framework for understanding how scientific knowledge translates to organisational application in collaborative research settings. This chapter builds on the previous two by exploring additional social contingencies, namely political factors, and the ways in which these impact upon the acquisition and eventual application of knowledge in and among organisations working collaboratively.

Collaborative Visioning projects create

organisations in their own right as participants come together to pursue a common goal. However, since these participants arrive from diverse organisations, there is also an opportunity for inter-organisational learning. Participants in collaborative groups become representatives of their originating organisation and bring to the setting, not only their own primary frames of reference, but also their organisation’s frame of reference. In order to develop a broad understanding of the dynamics occurring among knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilisation in collaborative research settings, it is important to understand the impact these disparate frames of reference have on this dynamic process of knowledge as it moves from research to application. Furthermore, this level of investigation is relevant because as representatives begin to learn and acquire knowledge, and the collective group build knowledge, the issue is then how this knowledge is transferred into organisational learning and reflected in the development of policy. The goal of a collaborative Visioning project is to see research findings produced through the ‘audit process’ drawn upon to inform policy


111

that would direct the strategic planning and management of a destination. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the emergent phenomena at an organisational and inter organisational level to appreciate fully how, and why, these collaborative networks draw in scientific knowledge in order to bring about organisational application. Accordingly, this chapter introduces the notions of organisational learning and considers the ways in which knowledge is managed within organisations. So that an association with the social, cognitive and affective influences presented thus far is established, a critique of the dominant models of decision making and policy formulation is presented, and through a blend of these, offers a framework for analysing collaborative research projects. The chapter then explores the appeal of collaborative Visioning projects and reviews the analysis of two recent Visioning exercises (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Helling, 1998). This work is then integrated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics occurring in and among organisations in collaborative settings. 6.1 Organisational Learning The notion of learning organisations has been has been developed as a framework to guide organisations through change and to help organisations develop ‘coping mechanisms’ to smooth transitional periods (Senge, 1990). It may be argued that collaborative tri-lateral arrangements, as described in Chapter Two, represent a more complex situation than that in a single organisational setting in that it involves an amalgam of separate public and private sector organisations, along with a loose array of community-based interests and alliances (Faulkner, 2002). The complexity arises as participants pursue individual agendas that are simultaneously characterised by commonalities and differences.

These characteristics, however, are not

uncommon within large corporations (Senge, 1990) and the realisation of a learning


112

organisation involves reconciling tensions, finding common ground for collaborative action, and transforming a competitive mindset to one of cooperation that benefits the organisation as a whole (Faulkner, 2002).

From this stance, a learning

organisation approach is applicable to a collaborative arrangement that brings together disparate parties to pursue a common goal.

Additionally, a learning

organisation approach was an explicit frame of reference for the Gold Coast Visioning Project (Falkner, 2002). Chapter Nine discusses the notion of a learning organisation in a prescriptive sense. That is, a learning organisation approach is discussed in terms of what was aspired to by the organisation that would form from collaborations that occurred as a result of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The following section of this chapter presents the concept of a learning organisation in a descriptive sense, in so much that it describes the ways by which an organisation might learn. A learning organisation is defined as one that is “able to deal with the problems and opportunities of today, and invest in its capacity to embrace tomorrow, because its members are continually focused on enhancing and expanding their collective awareness and capabilities” (Senge et al., 1994, p. 4). Consequently, learning organisations are involved in a “continuous testing of experience, and the transformation of that experience into knowledge [that is] accessible to the whole organisation, and relevant to its core purpose” (p. 49). If organisations are to engage in generative learning, that is, to reframe, to develop new conceptions and attitudes, to cognitively re-label existing classifications and amend standards of judgment, then they are engaging in cultural change.

This is because organisational culture is

defined as the assumptions, values, norms and tangible signs (artefacts) of organisation members and their behaviours (Vecchio et al., 1996).

The five


113

‘disciplines’ (Senge et al., 1994) required to cultivate a learning organisation provide some insights into the fundamental beliefs that would underlie a collaborative Visioning project: • Systems thinking. Systems thinking is a conceptual framework based on system dynamics.

It is highly conceptual and it provides ways of

understanding practical business issues as it looks at systems in terms of particular types of cycles (archetypes). Additionally, the essence of systems thinking lies in a mind shift: seeing interrelationships rather than linear cause-effect chains, and seeing processes of change rather than snapshots. The practice of systems thinking starts with the understanding of ‘feedback’, which demonstrates how actions can reinforce or counteract (balance) each other. It extends to learning when different types of ‘structures’ that recur again and again are recognised. Eventually, systems thinking forms a fertile language to describe an array of interrelationships and patterns of change. Ultimately, it simplifies life by recognising the deeper patterns underpinning events and details; • Personal mastery. Personal mastery is the discipline of continually clarifying and deepening one’s personal vision, of focusing energies, of developing patience, and of seeing reality objectively. This is with a view to individuals creating the results in life that they truly seek; • Mental models.

Mental models are deeply ingrained assumptions,

generalisations, or even pictures or images that influence how one’s world is interpreted and how action is taken. Working with mental models starts with personal reflection, learning to unearth one’s internal pictures of the world, and bring them to the surface so that they might be held rigorously to


114

scrutiny. It also includes the ability to carry on ‘learningful’ conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy, where people expose their own thinking effectively and make that thinking open to the influence of others; • Shared vision. A shared vision involves the discovery of shared ‘pictures of the future’ that foster genuine commitment and engagement rather than compliance and the principles and guiding practices by which that vision might be achieved; • Team learning. Team learning reflects the capacity of members of a team to suspend assumptions and enter into a genuine ‘thinking together.’ It also involves learning how to identify pathological patterns of interaction within and among teams that undermine learning. If acknowledged and presented creatively, such patterns of interaction can actually accelerate learning so that groups of people may reliably develop intelligence and ability greater than the sum of the individual members’ talents (pp. 4-6). Senge (1990, 1994) states that all five disciplines must be present in a learning organisation. Yet there is some disagreement on the importance of systems thinking relative to the other disciplines (Gavin, 2002). For some, systems thinking is no more important than any of the other disciplines. However, Senge (1990) contends that this is the discipline that makes the other disciplines ‘work’. Additionally, it is imperative that the five disciplines develop as an ensemble. This is challenging because it is much harder to integrate a set of new tools than simply introduce them independently. This is why systems thinking is the fifth discipline (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994).

It is the discipline that integrates all other

disciplines, fusing them into a coherent body of theory and practice. Without a systemic orientation, there is no motivation to look at how the disciplines interrelate


115

and enhance each of the other disciplines. Therefore, it is a continual reminder that the whole can exceed the sum of its parts (Gavin, 1994; Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). In a collaborative Visioning project, it is not so much cultural change that is brought about by employing these five disciplines. Rather, it is the establishment of a culture unique to the organisation that evolves, as disparate individuals come together to pursue a common goal. Thus, the generative learning in this instance involves the amendment of theories-in-use, or frames of reference, used by the organisations the participants originate from, as these theories enmesh to become unique to the emergent organisation.

The principles advocated in a learning

organisation approach imply that the kinds of cultural changes required involve ‘building trust and openness’, ‘empowering employee’, asking employees to ‘commit’ to organisational tasks, and asking previously competitive units to become ‘teams’ (Schein, 2002).

To make changes at this level requires more than

behavioural change. It requires the learner to reframe the situation, to learn new concepts and develop new attitudes (Argyris & Schon, 1974, 1996; Schein, 2002). If we are to understand the full implication of generative learning and the development of organisational culture in collaborative settings, it is essential to acknowledge the ways in which cognitive redefinition occurs in individuals and groups, and the role of social, cognitive and affective influences in this redefinition. One of the difficulties associated with collaborative Visioning projects is that outcomes that represent the ‘greater good’ may be dependent upon solutions that are less-than-favourable for some, or even many, of the parts (Faulkner, 2002). In terms of collaborative Visioning projects, it is difficult to imagine participants accepting sub-optimal outcomes in the interests of a better result for the region as a whole.


116

Therefore, it is argued that the successful engagement of participants in a collaborative arrangement will rest heavily upon reconciling the clash of individual and collective agendas. Further, if a learning organisation approach is to underpin a collaborative Visioning project, then the management of networks among participants, and of the knowledge that emerges throughout such a process, is pivotal to the project’s success and eventual organisational application. Consequently, the next section of this chapter looks at networks and knowledge management within and between organisations, and the contextual nature of organisational learning. 6.2 Networks and Knowledge Management As shown earlier, complex problem solving has been addressed by theories of bounded rationality (Simon, 1957).

However, these theories focus on solving

complex but structured problems. As a result, context, and how it emerges is not a central issue (Augier et al., 2001). Theories of organisations, as knowledge-creating entities have focused on how complex, unstructured problems are solved and context and contextualisation are considered central elements in the task (Knorr-Cetina, 1981; Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka et al., 2000). Nonaka & Kono (1998) suggest that an organisation can be conceptualised as a dynamic configuration of ‘ba’ (roughly meaning place). ‘Ba’ is defined as the context shared by those who interact with each other and ‘ba’ is the place where they create, share and use knowledge. ‘Ba’ is considered an emerging relationship among individuals, and between an individual and the environment. Additionally, Nonaka et al. (2000) note: ‘Ba’ lets participants share time and space, and yet it transcends time and space. In knowledge creation, it is important for participants to share time and space, as such a close, physical interaction is an important factor to sharing context and forming a common language


117

among participants. (p. 9)

Putting knowledge in context is important because knowledge-creating processes are essentially context-specific in terms of who participates and how they participate in the process (Knorr-Cetina, 1981; Nonaka, 1999; Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka et al., 2000).

The context here does not mean a static set of

surrounding conditions, but rather a dynamic process of which individual cognition is only a part. In ‘ba’ new knowledge is created out of existing knowledge through the change of meanings and contexts. According to Nonaka and Konno (1998), ‘ba’ can be thought of as a shared space for emerging relationships. This space can be physical, virtual, mental, or any combination of them. ‘Ba’ is created spontaneously, is fluid and constantly in motion.

It can be born and disappear quickly.

Furthermore, the boundary for ‘ba’ is fluid and can be altered quickly as it is set by the participants. ‘Ba’ is not restricted by history but rather is characterised by its ever-changing function and immediacy in response to need. Although the concept of ‘ba’ represents an attempt to define context, it does not explain how context materialises and is modified. Thus, Augier et al. (2001) argue that “we have yet to understand what happens inside ‘ba’, and what it is that makes ‘ba’ such an excellent place for knowledge creation” (p. 128). Seufert, von Krogh and Bach (1999) state that networks and knowledge management cannot be seen as two separate entities, but rather, integrated as interdependent elements which they term ‘knowledge networks’. The concept of knowledge networks is based on a theoretical perspective whereby networks are defined as a social relationship among actors (Lincoln, 1982; Mitchell, 1969). Actors in a social network can be individuals or groups, but also collectives of


118

organisations, communities or even societies (Seufert et al., 1999). The relationships evolving among actors can be categorised according to content, form and intensity. Content refers to products or services, information or emotions, form concerns the duration and closeness of the relationship and intensity considers the frequency of communication. Typically, the relationships among actors are of diverse forms, which may consist of various contents to be exchanged. The form and the intensity of the relationship occasion the network structure (Seufert et al., 1999). Further, the relationships between network members can be understood as deriving from their autonomy and interdependence, the coexistence of cooperation and competition as well as reciprocity and stability. Boundaries of networks are difficult to determine since they are constructed socially by the network members. Accordingly, they are referred to as blurred boundaries (Seufert et al., 1999).

From this perspective,

Seufert et al. (1999) suggest that the focus moves from the consideration and protection of the boundaries of an organisation to the management of and care for relationships. Concerning the integration of networking and knowledge management, two predominant aspects are considered crucial (Seufert et al., 1999).

First,

knowledge management should be holistic in the sense that it synthesises explicit and tacit knowledge. Furthermore, knowledge management should take a comprehensive view on where, rather than how, knowledge is being created and transferred. Although knowledge is often thought of as an objective commodity which is transferable independent of person and context, such a perspective denies the benefits of distributing tacit knowledge. Since tacit knowledge is deeply rooted in personal experiences, subjective insights, values and feelings, it is difficult to completely communicate and share. Seufert et al. (1999) argue that tacit knowledge


119

also can be conceptualised as possessing a technical and cognitive dimension. Whereas the technical dimension involves informal personal abilities and skills, the cognitive dimension encompasses an individual’s mental framework influenced by beliefs, values and convictions. For this reason, in order to effectively manage and use knowledge, a network must be assembled so that the knowledge and experience of individual members are available and accessible (Seufert et al., 1999). Seufert et al. (1999) propose a framework of knowledge networks which is composed of static and dynamic elements (see Figure 6.1). According to this framework, knowledge networks are conceptualised on three building-blocks. First, facilitating conditions comprise the internal structure and culture dimensions in which the knowledge processes take place in a network. These two elements define the enabling or inhibiting environment for knowledge creation and transfer. Knowledge work processes embody social interaction and communication processes on an individual and group level.

Following Nonaka

((Nonaka, 1991), these processes can be conceptualised as a knowledge spiral. That is, as a dynamic transformation-process between explicit and tacit knowledge on the different layers (see Figure 6.2). Within this spiral, socialisation refers to the exchange of tacit knowledge between individuals in order to impart personal knowledge and experience. Externalisation describes transformation processes and simultaneously means the conversion of tacit into explicit knowledge and the exchange of knowledge between individuals and a group.

The transformation of explicit knowledge into more

complex organised explicit knowledge represents the stage of combination (Nonaka, 1999). Different fields of explicit knowledge coalesce with each other and make new knowledge available on an organisation wide basis. Seufert et al. (1999) state


120

Social relationship taking place in institutional properties

Facilitating Conditions

Management Systems Corporate Culture

• structural dimension • cultural dimension

Organisational Structure

l ge/ Work Processes Knowed

Social relationship

Actor • • • •

l Knowedge Network Architecture

Individual Group Organisation Collectives of

organisations

Relationships • • •

Form Content intensity

Tools used within social relationships

• Organizational tools • Information and communication tools

Figure 6.1. A framework of knowledge networks depicting static and dynamic elements. Adapted from Seufert, von Krogh and Bach (1999).

the systemisation and refinement of explicit knowledge increases the practical value of existing knowledge and increases its transferability to all organisational units. Internalisation comprises the conversion of this organisation-wide, explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge of the individual. This conversion is dependent on the individual being able to recognise personally relevant information within the


121

organisation (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Seufert et al., 1999). The final layer of a knowledge network comprises the tool-set used within social relationships and is referred to as knowledge network architecture. These include organisational tools such as knowledge managers, along with information and communication tools (Barker & Camarata, 1998). From the point of view of a dynamic knowledge management model there are three aspects considered to be of utmost importance (Seufert et al., 1999). These are the interconnectivity of the different levels and areas of knowledge, the interconnectivity of knowledge work processes and knowledge network architecture, and the interconnectivity of

Explicit

Tacit

Epistemological Dimension

knowledge work processes and facilitating conditions. Some authors look upon

Ontological Dimension Individual

Organisation Group

Inter-Organisation

Figure 6.2. The dynamic transformation process between explicit and tacit knowledge (Adapted from Nonaka, 1991).

networks as a third form of organisation to be distinguished in its own right (Powell, 1990). However, for others they are conceptualised as a hybrid form of organisation because they contain elements of the originating organisations (Leydesdorff, 2000;


122

Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996; Seufert et al., 1999). One final conceptualisation of the way in which organisations learn that should be acknowledged is that put forth by Delahaye (2001). He suggests the capacity of an organisation to learn is a function of the dynamic interaction of rules and procedures, and creativity. Delahaye (2001) takes a systems approach to knowledge in organisations and suggests that organisations have two basic systems — the legitimate system and the shadow system. The role of the legitimate system is to ensure that the organisation survives in the short term by the efficient use of the systems resources and strives to maintain the status quo. This system uses negative feedback loops and single loop learning to preserve the status quo.

Single loop learning passes on current

knowledge without challenging the veracity or usefulness of the knowledge (Argyris & Schon, 1996).

Therefore, the role of the legitimate system is to pull the

organisation towards a state of equilibrium. This is achieved through controls and procedures that ensure predictability and occasion ‘comfort zones’ within which one can operate with relatively little effort, but they also mask divergence, obscure serendipity and shroud differences (Sparrow, 1998).

Control and procedural

mechanisms legitimise the psychological addictions that are employed to ‘buffer’ uncertainties and in turn, awareness of one’s feelings towards, and understanding of a particular issue (Schaef & Fassel, 1988).

Delahaye (2001) argues that if an

organisation remains in a state of total equilibrium for a period of time, the organisation will stagnate, become toxic, and slowly poison itself. The shadow system, on the other hand, provides the organisation with energy, usually in the form of knowledge, which will ensure the organisation’s long-term future (Delahaye, 2001). The role of the shadow system is to challenge operating procedures and the culture by creating and importing new knowledge. The shadow


123

system is predicated on positive feedback loops and double-loop learning. As noted in Chapter Five, double-loop learning occurs when an individual or group challenge the underlying values of an idea, assumption, or concept (Argyris & Schon, 1996). Where the legitimate system stabilises an organisation, the shadow system pulls the organisation towards chaos. It is in the state of chaos that organisations are at their most creative, however, this creativity is accompanied by the potential for the organisation to destroy itself. Both the legitimate system and shadow systems have significant roles to play and should be given appropriate power and energy to fulfil their roles. The shadow system has a responsibility to refine new ideas so that they are acceptable to the legitimate system. This is a political process, and accordingly, is often alien to those within the shadow system. Organisational members within a shadow system must develop these political processes or another person may need to take responsibility.

The legitimate system, therefore, holds a responsibility to

evaluate all new ideas and ensure that valuable resources are not wasted. The challenge to this system is that new ideas may pose a threat to the existing culture or values system thereby activating the affective states associated with change. Finally, Delahaye (2001) stresses that the two systems described here do not operate in isolation – they are mutually dependant systems.

Accordingly, the

symbiotic relationship between the two systems needs to be carefully managed. In this way, the organisation hovers between equilibrium and chaos, a state referred to as ‘bounded instability’. To depart from this state of bounded instability means that one system has gained greater power than the other has, and in this imbalanced state, the survival of an organisation is most under threat. A collaborative Visioning project provides the ideal forum in which to investigate the conceptualisation and utilisation of knowledge in tri-lateral settings.


124

A Visioning project allows the investigation of organisational learning where disparate participants coalesce and create an organisation within its own right yet, since these individuals represent and belong to other organisations, there is simultaneously an opportunity for inter-organisational learning to take place through the networks that are established.

The literature has shown that establishing

functional networks means developing a common language, a set of working assumptions, and trust among dissimilar people. It is suggested this is achieved through demonstrations of patience (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), tolerance (Gavin, 2002) and compromise (Rietan, 1998).

However, compromise or

‘satisficing’ limits the capacity for creativity and diversity resulting in safe, ‘incremental’, middle-of-the-road solutions that none of the participants fully support (Rietan, 1998). Additionally, it is the balance between creativity and rules and procedures designed to ‘buffer’ uncertainties that influence the extent to which organisations may learn. Given the potential influence of the cognitive, social, and affective factors mentioned thus far, it is appropriate to ask why there is such a trend to engage in tri-later arrangements of knowledge production. Certainly, its popularity belies the apparent difficulties inherent with such processes.

It is thought that the

popularity of collaborative arrangements rests in its potential to foster action designed to achieve common goals. Yet as the research shows, common goals and actions are infrequently achieved (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998). The following section offers possible explanations as to why this might be so and reviews the dominant literature relating to organisational decision making and policy formulation.


125

6.3 Models of Policymaking 6.3.1 Bounded Rationality Decision making in organisations is often pictured as a coherent and rational process in which alternative choices and outcomes are considered in an orderly manner until the optimal alternative is selected.

Yet, as many members of

organisations have discovered from their own experience, real decision processes in organisations infrequently fit this depiction.

In response to this, the theory of

Bounded Rationality (Simon, 1957) was developed to account for the distinction between scientific rationality and the kind of rationality that characterises organisational decision making. In this model, choices in human action are seen as limited and imperfect in terms of one’s knowledge of the situation and expected outcomes. This is because there are cognitive limits to an individual’s ability to pursue wholly rational, purposeful behaviour. Rather than optimise, that is, to seek the optimal solution from an exhaustive search of all possible alternatives in order to identify a choice that satisfies all requirements, actors ‘satisfice’.

Whereas

optimising involves the identification of one optimal choice, satisficing is the identification of a choice that fulfils requirements sufficiently (Simon, 1957). Satisficing then, is a decision maker’s rational behaviour in situations of ambiguity. The concepts of a limited working memory and subsequent use of heuristics to reduce cognitive demands, as described in Chapter Four, support this explanation. Simon (1957) adds that rational decision making is further bounded by organisational structure and communication channels among actors. Organisational constraints on rationality include the establishment of programs and standard operating procedures that create routine activity, specialisation of activities and roles so that attention is directed to a particular


126

restricted set of values, and the simultaneous and sequential pursuit of conflicting goals (Simon, 1957). Additional constraints encompass the factoring of goals and tasks into programs and departments that are semi-independent of each other to reduce interdependencies. This restricts the range of stimuli and situations that would broaden perception and, as a result, fosters concerns with narrow interests. Finally, training and indoctrination activities (or socialisation processes) lead individuals to make choices that the organisation would like them to make (Simon, 1957).

In summary, the key concepts in the theory of bounded rationality are

factored problems and fractionated power, parochial priorities and perceptions, sequential attentions to conflicting goals, standard operating procedures, and programs and routines.

The concept of bounded rationality has come to be

recognised widely, though not unanimously, as an accurate depiction of human judgement and choice — one that recognises the limitations inherent in the functioning of the human mind (March, 1988a). 6.3.2 Incrementalism Further to the work of Simon (1957), it has been argued that insistence on comprehensive analysis, or the rational model of decision making, results in either inaction or neglect of important information as individuals are overwhelmed by the information they are required to process (Hayes, 1992; Matheson, 1998).

An

alternative approach to understanding choice in decisions that would inform policy is that of Incrementalism (Lindblom, 1959, 1979).

The central assumptions of

Incrementalism can be outlined in four key points. First, in Incrementalism there are various actors involved in policymaking and implementation (Lindblom, 1959), including bureaucracies, interest groups, and the public at large (Hayes, 1992). Second, because there are many individuals and


127

conglomerates involved in the policy process, Incrementalism concedes that there are opposing preferences in agenda setting. In other words, there is a lack of consensus on identifying which issues policy should address (Lindblom, 1959). Third, Incrementalism affirms that there are also divergent views on how goals should be pursued because agreement upon strategy is "possible only to the extent that values are agreed upon" (Lindblom 1959, p. 83). The idea that values should be clarified in advance of the examination of alternative policies is alluring, but what happens in instances when there is disagreement among decision makers on critical values? Preferences of the majority are frequently not known and in the absence of public discussion on an issue, there are often no preferences. Decision makers are often reduced to deciding policy without having clarified objectives. The value problem is a problem of adjustments at a margin. There is no way to state marginal objectives or values except in terms of particular problems. Given the complexities of social objectives, they do not always have the same relative values. Any attempt to develop a ranking or ordering of values in general terms so that they might be applied across different decisions is to ignore the relevant marginal preferences and their underlying values. Subsequently, in the absence of values and the ability to choose among policies to achieve them, decision makers choose directly among policies to achieve them. That is, decision makers choose directly among alternative policies that differ only through the marginal combinations of values.

According to Incrementalism, the only practical way to disclose one’s

relevant marginal values, even to oneself, is to describe the policy or decision one chooses to achieve them. Therefore, one chooses among values and policies at the same time (Lindblom, 1959). An important note here is that the attention of the decision maker is focused on marginal or incremental values.


128

Fourth, the selection of value goals and empirical analysis of the required action are not distinct from one another but are closely intertwined (Lindblom, 1959). Therefore, since means and ends are not distinct, means-end analysis is often inappropriate or limited. Rather, the test of a good policy is typically that which is agreed upon between analysts without their agreeing that it is the most appropriate means to a desired outcome (Lindblom, 1959, 1979). Stated differently, a policy is deemed ‘good’ because decisions that arise through the sharing of common thought are socially validated (Hinsz, 1990; Stasser, 1999).

A means-end approach is

possible only to the extent that values are agreed upon, are reconcilable, and stable at the margin.

For the method of successive limited comparisons, the test of

correctness on policy or decision choice is agreement on the decision itself, which remains possible even when agreement on values is not. To achieve this, Incrementalism states that actors use their political power (social influence) to negotiate what and how something should be done.

This

negotiating ultimately leads to a consensus on the lowest common denominator (Hayes,1992). Policies, therefore, tend to be watered down or "modest in resources and scope" (Frohock, 1979, p. 55). In short, incremental policymaking "is a process of mutual adjustment among a multiplicity of actors having different self-interests and divergent conceptions of the public interest" (Hayes 1992, p. 13). According to this model, decision making produces policies that depart ever so slightly from previous ones (Lindblom, 1959, 1979). Hence, this type of decision making is ‘incremental’ in nature and vastly simplifies the task of complex decision making. This simplification occurs through the limitation of policies that differ in only a relatively marginal way from the status quo (Lindblom, 1959, 1979). This reduces the number of alternatives to be investigated and the depth of the investigation. In


129

Western democracies, analyses are largely limited to the incremental or marginal differences in existing policies.

This has the combined benefit of simplifying

problems and deeming their analyses relevant since they are legitimated through only marginal differences of that which has previously been deemed appropriate. Two final comments should be made about Incrementalism. First, decision making, in this theory, is not viewed as an isolated instance. Rather, it is a perpetual process in which feedback is continually received so that policies might be adjusted in order to approach a desired outcome (Lindblom, 1959, 1979). The process of mutual adjustment among stakeholders means that particular values that are ignored at one point in the decision process become central at another point.

Mutual

adjustment is more pervasive than the explicit form it takes in negotiation among groups, and it persists through the reciprocal impacts of groups on each other, even in the absence of communication. It is argued that the benefit of this form of policy construction is that it helps to prevent disasters (Frohock, 1979), but as the Vietnam War demonstrated, such an assumption about Incrementalism does not always hold true (Kattenburg, 1980; McNamara, 1995). Finally, a criticism of Incrementalism is that it does not focus adequately on the organisational structures and processes that work to limit full rationality. Organisational structures and processes also make decision making incremental (Hayes, 1992). Acknowledgement of the effects of organisational structures and processes on decision making and policy formulation is addressed more capably in the Garbage Can Model (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1972) of decision making. 6.3.3 Garbage Can Model of Decision Making The Garbage Can Model (Cohen et al., 1972) of decision making views organisations as organised anarchies that have three main characteristics. First, they


130

possess a variety of ill-defined and inconsistent preferences. These can be described more as a loose collection of ideas than as a coherent structure. Such an organisation discovers preferences through action more than it acts on the basis of preferences (Cohen et al., 1972; Olsen, 2001). Second, unclear technologies imply a lack of understanding of the organisation’s own processes by its members. It operates on trial and error procedures, the residue of learning based on accidents of past experience and pragmatic inventions of necessity. The third characteristic of organised anarchies is the nature of participation. Participants vary in the amount of time and effort (energy) (Bendor, Moe, & Shotts, 2001) they devote to different domains, and involvement varies from one time to another (Cohen et al., 1972). This results in uncertain and changing boundaries and situations of social ambiguity (Bendor, Moe, & Shotts, 2001). The audience and decision makers for, and the particular kind of decision, change inconsistently (Olsen, 2001). Traditionally, decision making is thought of as a process for solving problems, but, according to the Garbage Can Theory (Cohen et al., 1972), that is often not what happens in practice. Problems are considered in the context of some decision choice but decision choices are made only when the shifting combination of problems, solutions and decision makers happen to make action possible (Cohen et al., 1972). From this perspective, an organisation is a collection of choices looking for problems; issues and feelings looking for decision situations in which they might gain voice, and decision makers looking to justify their own existence (Cohen & Olsen, 1976). This view of decision making focuses attention on the way the meaning of a decision changes over time, which reflects social construction. It emphasises the


131

strategic effects of timing through the introduction of choices and problems, the time pattern of available energy and the impact of organisational structure. Central to the Garbage Can Theory (Cohen et al., 1972) is the notion that organisational outcomes arise from independent ‘streams’ of problems, solutions, participants, and choice opportunities, whose random intersection generates decisions. In this scheme, choice opportunities are the garbage cans. As problems, solutions, and participants move independently about the organisation, various combinations find themselves dumped into these cans, and the emergent decisions (if any) depend on whatever mixtures the intersecting streams happen to generate. The organisation’s basic structure (notably, its rules), channels and constrains the flow of these ‘streams’, which in turn, shapes the organisation’s patterns of choice and problem solving. It should be noted that the driving force of the garbage can explanation is process, which is more than just dynamic. Choices happen for no apparent reason and outcomes are divorced from intention.

Solutions are disconnected from problems as participants wander

aimlessly in and out of decision areas. In this mass of loosely coupled activity, some decisions do get made, and some problems do get solved. There is a chaotic brand of ‘intelligence’ at work (Bendor et al., 2001), but this is as a function of the timedependent convergence of events, not a result of the rational effects of plans or goals. The hallmark of Garbage Can Theory is its attempt to understand organisations by reference to streams of problems, solutions, participants, and choice opportunities, which are independent of one another and exogenous to the system (Cohen & Olsen, 1976; Cohen et al., 1972). On the surface, this formulation seems to be a simple, straightforward way of characterising the internal dynamics of an organisation. However, under closer scrutiny, the argument is problematic (Bendor et al., 2001).


132

First, in practice, organisational problems are characteristically brought to light by participants within it. Similarly, solutions appear in organisations because they are promoted by certain participants in consideration of the problems they face (Bendor et al., 2001). This is common sense. People are the carriers of problems and solutions. This fact is acknowledged by Cohen, March and Olsen (1972) when they state, "to understand processes within organisations, one can view a choice opportunity as a garbage can into which various kinds of problems and solutions are dumped by participants as they are generated" (p. 2). The question then remains, if problems and solutions are dumped by participants, then how can streams of problems and solutions be independent of the stream of participants? Clearly, which problems and which solutions get dumped into a particular garbage can depend on which participants happen to go there.

They are not

independent streams. Additionally, Bendor et al., (2001) notes a further anomaly in relation to these so-called ‘independent’ streams. The term ‘solution’ is taken to mean "an action or process of solving a problem" (p. 173). Therefore, by definition, solutions do not exist on their own, independent of specific problems. The Garbage Can Theory (Cohen et al., 1972) emphasises organisational dynamics, but also recognises a significant role for structure. The structure of an organisation shapes how participants, problems, and solutions are coupled with choice situations and subsequently, the outcomes they engender. However, what Cohen et al., (1972) suggest about structure is very limited, and according to Bendor et al., (2001) what is omitted is crucial, which gives rise to two issues. The first arises because the Garbage Can Theory (Cohen et al., 1972) takes structure as exogenous, thus, not acknowledging its source or form (Bendor et al., 2001). The focus of the theory is on the consequences of structure, “not on its origin,


133

design, or change” (Bendor et. al., 2001, p. 173). Precisely because structure does have a major effect on organisational processes and outcomes, decision makers frequently consider it fundamental to moulding organisational behaviour (Weissinger-Baylon, 1988). To say that structure has significant influence implies that it can be used to achieve certain ends, and participants in positions of authority certainly have incentives to do that (Bendor et al., 2001). The second problem with Garbage Can Theory is the kinds of structure its proponents consider relevant to the understanding of organisations.

Essential

components of real organisations, such as authority, delegation, and control (social influence) are omitted and therefore the theory overlooks or misinterprets much organisational behaviour (Bendor et al., 2001). Virtually all organisations have authority structures of some sort, which create both control opportunities and control problems. The structure of an organisation largely reflects efforts to control and coordinate the actions of separate but interdependent individuals (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), no matter how anarchistic it may be. Structure can induce order and productivity, but the Garbage Can Theory does not take this into account, and therefore, removes structure from the realm of choice (Bendor et al., 2001). Finally, there is an internal inconsistency in the model used to describe the Garbage Can Theory (Cohen et al., 1972) and the theory itself. In the model (Cohen et al., 1972), a key concept in understanding how choices are made is ‘energy’, a concept that is omitted from the theory (Bendor et al., 2001). Therefore, choices are seen as the product of an energy balancing mechanism. All problems require a certain amount of energy in order to be solved, but the amount of energy required may vary across organisations depending on the ‘load’ they face –– the higher the load, the more energy is required per problem. The energy required to make a choice


134

is the sum of the energy requirements of the problems attached to a subject. In any period, the energy supplied to a choice subject is the sum of the amounts brought by each of the participants to the subject area. This energy supply is assumed to accumulate over time: The total energy in a choice subject area is the sum of all the energy anyone has ever brought to it since that choice was first introduced. If the total usable energy equals or exceeds the energy required by the problems currently attached to a subject, then the choice is made and the problems are solved. Because of latent energy, however, problems may get solved even though no one is present to work on them. More perplexing still, a choice can be ‘made’ even when there are no problems in the choice arena at all (Bendor et al., 2001). Indeed, this is likely, because when there are no problems, the energy requirement is zero, and the presence of any agents (even without participants), or any latent energy, automatically satisfies the energy requirement. To comprehend this fully requires clarity as to how energy relates to the movement of people and problems. Bendor et al. (2001) suggest they both follow a simple decision rule: Go to the choice that is closest to being made. That is, go to the choice area with the smallest gap between the energy required to solve problems and the energy supplied by participants (including latent energy) or, the smallest energy deficit. In each problem period, participants scan all choice subject areas, calculate the energy deficit, and move in the next period to the open subject area with the smallest deficit.

Again, this demonstrates the human tendency toward mental

economy (Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993). The notions put forth thus far are not intended to diminish the explanatory power of the Garbage Can Theory per se. Rather, it is to demonstrate how the underlying tenets of the theory may be strengthened if its application is anchored in


Bounded Rationality.

135

Accordingly, the limitations of participants’ cognitive

processes must be acknowledged in conjunction with the effects of organisational structure and its role in creating control opportunities and problems – what Allison (1971) calls the

‘pulling and hauling that is politics’, and that through which

decisions are made. Allison (1971) addressed the issue of influences in the decisions of policy makers in a landmark paper where comparisons of three conceptual models of the decision making process in policy analysis were drawn. A major contribution of this publication was the parsimonious acknowledgement and explanation of the levels of analysis in policy making. 6.3.4 Levels of Analysis in Policy Making The first of these three models, labelled the Rational Policy Paradigm, viewed decision-making as a response made by a unitary figure, with one set of specified goals, one set of perceived options and a single estimate of the consequences arising from each alternative. Action is chosen in response to a strategic problem and is subsequently conceived as a steady-state choice among alternatives.

Thus, the

Rational choice is value-maximising as it is the alternative with consequences that align most closely with the predefined goals and objectives (Allison, 1971). The second paradigm views the process as being comprised not through a unitary decision-maker, but rather through a constellation of loosely allied organisations on top of which sits a single authoritative figure (Allison, 1971). The eventual outcomes are outputs to organisational processes, the majority of which are determined by previously established procedures or, standard operating procedures. These standard operating procedures, therefore, constitute the options available to leaders confronted with any problem. It is the outputs of the organisation which


136

‘raises the initial problem, provide information and make the initial moves that develop the issue that is presented to the leader’ (p.87). Further to that, in the third conceptual model, the key players who sit on top of organisation are not a monolithic group. Rather, each in his or her own right is a player in a central competitive game. This model, termed Bureaucratic Politics, sees no unitary figure, but many actors as players whose behaviour can be understood as outcomes of complex bargaining games as opposed to organisational outputs (Allison, 1971). These players focus not on one, but many diverse problems, in terms of no consistent set of strategic objectives but rather according to various conceptions of organisational and personal goals. Thus, decisions are not made by rational choice, but by the ‘pulling and hauling that is politics’ (p.171). Whilst the players have positions which define what they ‘may’ and must do, they are first and foremost individual people. Individuality infers differences and the core of the Bureaucratic politics mix is personality.

Each individual’s basic

operating style, response to adversities and the complimentary or antagonistic reactions among personalities are for Allison, irreducible pieces of the policy blend. Moreover, each individual moves to their position with their own agendas and ‘baggage’, including sensitivities to particular issues, commitments to various programs, and personal standing and debts with groups of society. Allison (1971) does not suggest these models are mutually exclusive alternatives to explaining decision-making, but rather that each paradigm concentrates on one class of variables within an overall framework identifying the complexity of the policy/decision-making process.

The framework he presents

creates an awareness of the levels within the policy making process that are susceptible to influences that might affect the eventual outcome.


137

While Allison states that it is the outputs of an organisation, or the standard operating procedures that raises awareness of issues and brings these issues to the attention of policy makers and places them on the agenda. Kingdon (1995) however, identifies problems, policies, and politics as three relatively independent streams through which various participants interact to ultimately place items on the agenda. 6.3.5 Agenda Setting According to Kingdon’s fluid, process-oriented model, an issue is most likely to make it to the agenda when the three streams converge, and a ‘policy entrepreneur’ is positioned to help push the issue onto the agenda. As Kingdon suggests, conditions that are less than ideal permeate throughout society, and are seldom addressed through policy change unless these conditions are perceived as a problem. Not all problems can be solved by government intervention, and some matters evaporate because attention wanes, or more pressing issues emerge. Identifying a problem is crucial to agenda setting. The dominant means by which problems are identified are indicators, focusing events, and feedback. Indicators are used to assess the magnitude of a condition. A focusing event, such as a crisis, draws attention to certain conditions and through feedback, policy makers learn about the conditions of certain problems. The chances of a given proposal or subject rising on an agenda markedly enhanced when they are linked to what is perceived to be an important problem. The second of the three streams, the policy stream, is dependent on a group of participants consisting of government specialists, academics, and special groups. The policy stream refers to advice that is regarded as ‘good advice’. In kingdon’s model, loose knit communities consisting of such advisors constantly propose and debate solutions to various societal conditions and create an environment where ideas


138

bubble around in what is called the “... policy primeval soup [with] many ideas floating around, bumping into one another, encountering new ideas, and forming combinations and recombinations” (Kingdon, 1995, p. 200). The policy stream changes in tandem with the problem stream and external events. The political stream is the last of the three streams identified by Kingdon. This stream creates a dynamic environment, characterised by changes in interest group pressure, swings in national mood, and changes in government, in which both the problem stream and policy stream operate within. This stream is critical to the movement of an issue to the agenda, since as Kingdon states, agenda setting is ultimately determined by elected officials. In order for an issue to gain agenda status, there needs to be a convergence of the problem, policy and political streams when the policy window opens. The policy window is the opportunity for action on given initiatives – they present themselves and stay open only for short periods. A policy window usually opens because of changes in the political stream. In order for the the three streams to converge when the policy window opens, there needs to be a policy entrepreneur willing to join the three streams together.. The policy entrepreneur is pivotal to the success of an issue reaching an agenda. They are an advocate who is willing to invest resources (time, money, reputation, and energy) to promote a position on any given matter in order to bring it to the attention of those who have the true power to place it on the agenda. In light of the models of policy making presented in this chapter, Kingdon’s study on agenda setting is a important addition in developing an overall understanding of the policy making process. Conditions that become problems for some are never addressed by any form of public policy, unless they succeed in


139

making to the agenda. Perhaps more importantly, it highlights the tensions that might be apparent in a collaborative research undertaking that aims to bring about what is, fundamentally, non-incremental (or at least, less incremental) change. At some level, participants within a collaborative setting want to be synoptically rational in a system that is incremental for all the right reasons, but with these prevailing conditions, how is a non-incremental system introduced?

If a collaborative research

undertaking, such as a Visioning project is to realise its objectives, through the introduction of policies to inform and direct the strategic planning and marketing of a destination, then it first must create an agenda for change, which begins first at the edges, but ultimately, aims to do more.

By creating changes in the political

environment, as described by Kingdon, it is then possible to draw attention to certain conditions, and create policies that would bring about less incremental change. For the purpose of this research, the realities of policy/decision making in organisations is approached eclectically, that is, as a synthesis of the theories presented. By focusing on different analytic categories of policy making, it is then possible to understand the different processes within each category. It is necessary to develop this level of understanding in order to them understand how these processes interact, in order to understand the development of policy making in its entirety. The Garbage Can Theory (Cohen & Olsen, 1975, 1976; Cohen et al., 1972) explains much of why inappropriate decisions are made if the theory is anchored in Bounded Rationality (Simon, 1957) — that is, if organisational processes are viewed interdependently with individual limitations, and the control opportunities and control problems that arise through organisational structure (Allison, 1971; Benner & Sandstrom, 2000). This then explains why politics so frequently interfere with decision choices, and changes in policies are predominantly incremental in nature


140

(Lindblom, 1959, 1979), but also highlights the tension inherent in a collaborative research undertaking that aims to bring about less incremental change. In symbiosis, these theories of decision making and policy formulation (Cohen & Olsen, 1975, 1976; Cohen et al., 1972; Lindblom, 1959, 1979; Simon, 1957; Allison, 1971; Kingdon, 1995) and the cognitive and social issues addressed in Chapters Four and Five are mutually reinforcing and offer a more inclusive platform for analysis than if viewed in isolation.

Consequently, this synthesis of

policy/decision making theories provides a more comprehensive understanding of the realities of decision making and policy formulation in organisations. Furthermore, it allows for a more critical analysis of investigations into the effectiveness of recent Visioning projects, the findings of which served to inform the approach to, and management of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. 6.4 Collaborative Visioning Arrangements There are several reasons why collaborative Visioning might foster action. First, the vision itself is intended to be inspirational (Bryson, 1995).

Second,

stakeholders are motivated by their own interests. Accordingly, action is more likely when stakeholders are faced with an immediate problem than when they are asked to contemplate how an ideal future might be achieved. Participants expect short-term results, though they need also to believe there will be long-term benefits (Innes, 1996).

Third, a collaborative process need not be initiated by public-sector

bureaucracy, which is often perceived to be incapable of co-ordination with outsiders to achieve goals (Innes, 1996) and opposed to radical change (Pierce, 1993). Fourth, collaboration and consensus building are supposed to be uniquely suited to finding workable solutions (Innes & Boohar, 1999) and, collaboration among stakeholders is intended to bring to light all of the most relevant knowledge on the subject, resulting


141

in a richer understanding of ideas, leading to more innovative solutions and policies (Innes, 1996; Innes & Boohar, 1996; Bradley, 1991). Further to this, Healey (1998) suggests that collaboration potentially avoids the cost of resolving conflicts among stakeholders in the long term. Benveniste (1989) argues that collaborative relations may be more politically legitimate if they give stakeholders a greater influence in the decision making which affects their lives and that collaboration improves the co ordination of policies and related actions.

Finally, collaboration is thought to

promote consideration of the economic, environmental and social impacts of decision making (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999). Such joint working may also promote a shared ownership of resulting decisions or policies and thereby channel energies into joint implementation or co-production (Susskind & Elliot, 1983) The literature tends to emphasise the benefits of collaboration and Visioning by celebrating its success, but largely fails to identify its weaknesses and those factors which most impede the utilisation of knowledge in subsequent policymaking tasks (Helling, 1998). Additionally, while there have been studies to evaluate the outcome of collaborative arrangements (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998) and the impact of social process that more or less enhance the success of such ventures in terms of outcomes (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Hall, 1998; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Reed, 1997; Selin & Chavez, 1995), there is little evidence of investigations into the processes that underlie, and might facilitate the creation, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge in collaborative undertakings. 6.4.1 Atlanta 2020 In 1991, regional leaders and staff from the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), the regional planning agency for the Atlanta Metro area, started to look at


142

what the region should look like in the year 2020. The actual process became known as VISION 2020 and looked to produce a long-range, comprehensive planning effort to serve as a catalyst for creating regionwide consensus on the future (ARC, 1993). An analysis of the Atlanta 2020 Visioning project (Helling, 1998) suggested that where collaborative Visioning is used to guide and inform urban planning, the efficiency and effectiveness of such projects could be improved by insisting on public discussion of the core issues prior to the commitment of time and money. The findings of the study suggest that collaborative Visioning project outcomes are encumbered by setting process goals rather than objective outcomes, and by requiring consensus in the absence of conduits to stimulate compromise. In other words, it pursued consensus without having a clear mandate, incentive or pressing problem to foster participation or spur negotiation and change. The study showed that the Atlanta 2020 Visioning project was effective in promoting interpersonal interaction, yet this yielded few ‘clearly significant immediate results from the list of action initiatives’ and produced no plan capable of achieving the vision. Therefore, it could be argued that co-operative social networks are a necessary but insufficient condition to produce tangible outcomes through collaborative projects. Stakeholder interviews revealed a fear that failure to implement the action items listed would create cynicism, which would only serve to make stakeholder participation more difficult in the future (Helling, 1998). Although staff at all levels of the Atlanta Regional Commission maintained that they had wanted to foster a sense of stakeholder ownership through increased control and responsibility throughout the process, more responsibility than was intended rested with the commission (Helling, 1998). Interestingly, post-project interviews with stakeholders pointed to various indications that the process had


143

‘belonged’ to the Atlanta Regional Commission. Wood and Gray (1991) suggest high stakes and a sense of urgency are necessary conditions for successful collaboration.

The motivation to collaborate, the need to enhance institutional

legitimacy and to protect interests in common resources, and the desire to achieve a shared understanding of and response to a problem are other preconditions that have been identified. While many of these preconditions were present in the Atlanta 2020 Visioning project, pressures or incentives to participate and bring about meaningful change were not (Helling, 1998). 6.4.2 Hopevalley Project Bramwell and Sharman (1999) proposed a theoretical framework by which to assess whether local collaborative arrangements are inclusionary and involve collective learning and consensus building. The framework considers whether power imbalances between stakeholders are reduced through collaborations and develops the notion of partial consensus. The framework consists of three sets of issues, these being the scope of the collaboration, the intensity of the collaboration and the degree to which consensus emerges among participants. Each of these factors is made up of several layers of relationships and representations (see Table 6.1) Part of the difficulty in assessing collaborative arrangements through this framework (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999) is that two very different dynamics are often included within the one sub-level factor. For example, item B3 relates to the


144

Table 6.1. Framework in which to assess collaborative arrangements (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999) Scope of the Collaboration (A) • The extent to which participating stakeholders is representative of all relevant stakeholders. (A1) • The extent to which participation is influenced by recognition of potential benefits. • Whether the collaboration includes a facilitator and the stakeholders responsible for implementation. (A2) • The extent to which individuals representing stakeholder groups is representative of that group. (A3) • The number of stakeholders involved through the participation techniques. (A4) • The extent to which there is initial agreement among stakeholders about the intended scope of the collaboration. (A5) Intensity of the Collaboration (B) • The degree to which participants accept that collaboration is likely to produce different outcomes and that may have to modify their own approach. (B1) • When and how often stakeholders are involved. (B2) • The extent to which stakeholders receive information and are consulted about the activities of the collaboration. (B3) • Whether the use of participation techniques only disseminates information or also involves direct interaction among stakeholders. (B4) • The degree to which the dialogue among participants reflects openness, honesty, tolerant and respectful speaking and listening, confidence and trust. (B5) • The extent to which participants understand, respect and learn from each others’ different forms of argument. (B6) • The extent to which the participants come to understand, respect, and learn from each others’ different interests, forms of knowledge, systems of meaning, values and attitudes. (B7) • The extent to which the facilitator of the collaborative arrangement exerts control over decision making. (B8) Degree to which Consensus Emerges (C) • Whether participants who are working to build consensus also accept that some participants will not agree or embrace all the resulting policies. (C1) • Extent to which there is consensus about the issues, the policies, the purposes of the policies, and how the consequences of the policies are assessed and reviewed. (C2) • Extent to which consensus and “ownership” emerges across the inequalities between stakeholders or reflects these inequalities. (C3) • Extent to which stakeholders accept that there are systematic constraints on what is feasible. (C4) • Whether stakeholders appear willing to implement the resulting policies. (C5)


145

extent to which stakeholders receive information and are consulted about the activities of the collaboration. The receipt of information and consultation about activities are likely to impact upon collaborative outcomes very differently. To combine them into one factor makes the analysis opaque at best. Furthermore, when Bramwell and Sharman (1999) applied this framework to the analysis of the Hope Valley Visitor Management Plan Working Group, they acknowledged negative effects resulting from inadequate consultation with stakeholders about the activities of the collaboration, but no mention is made of the extent to which stakeholders received information or how this impacted on the eventual outcomes of the project. Item B7 continues in this same vein. The results of the study into the Hope Valley Project (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999) state that respondents did not feel that stakeholders came to respect, understand or learn from each other’s different interests and attitudes within working group meetings. While acknowledgement is accorded to interests and attitudes, again, no mention is made of the impact of understanding, respecting or learning (all irreconcilable concepts in themselves) of others’ forms of knowledge, systems of meaning or values in their analysis (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999). As in the Atlanta 2020 Visioning project (Helling, 1998), the Hope Valley project (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999) was successful in developing social networks and dispelling initial distrust among some stakeholders.

However, delays in

implementation of the developed plan have resulted in disillusionment in several of the stakeholders. As several stakeholders felt there was insufficient consultation on activities of the collaboration, there was not a real sense of ‘ownership’ of the subsequent plan. A key issue is that the working group depended on implementation being carried out by its own members through their own organisations. Without this


146

transfer of ownership to other resource allocation arenas, the plan was marginalised (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999). This highlights a fundamental dilemma for many collaborative initiatives — the need to retain independence in developing policies, while also depending on the stakeholders with the relevant resources to adopt the policies and finance the related actions. From this perspective, it is argued that the stakeholders with these resources have considerable power (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999). 6.4.3 Balance of Power Jamal and Getz (1995) acknowledge that the tourism system is highly fragmented. No single organisation or individual can exert direct control over a destination’s development process.

However, in outlining the stages of a

collaborative planning process, they suggest that power, or the balance of power, should be addressed at all stages. This is what was referred to earlier as control opportunities or problems (Bendor et al., 2001). Furthermore, they argue that it is possible to address the issue by including legitimate stakeholders and identifying a suitable convenor at an early stage in the collaborative planning process. Where power is initially unbalanced they suggest a local authority, for example a local government, may be a suitable convenor when the issues revolve around directing a community’s future growth and development.

Entrusting local authorities to

convene power relations assumes these authorities will be neutral arbitrators in the planning process. Yet it has been shown that governance institutions have their own agendas in the formulation and implementation of policy (Clark, 1984; Dye, 1986; Rees, 1990). Reed (1997) argues that rather than being viewed as an instrumental variable describing something that can be managed and balanced, power should be incorporated into studies of collaborations as “an explanatory variable that


147

demonstrates why collaborative efforts succeed or fail” (p. 589). Moreover, he suggests that while it is true that individuals often rely on coalitions with other private or public individuals or agencies, such an interpretation masks the pivotal role that actions of individuals can have at the local scale. Difficulties in achieving a collaborative solution are directly related to the differences in value orientation between stakeholders (Gray, 1989). Thereby this reinforces the importance of actions that would promote the development of relationship building and the emergence of trust between stakeholders. In light of the available research (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998), the fundamental difficulties that seem to be associated with collaborate Visioning projects relates to lack of stakeholder engagement in the process. This results from the over involvement of the facilitating agency (Helling, 1998) and/or a lack of a sense of ownership of the outcomes by the stakeholders (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998) as a result of the degree to which stakeholders have been involved and consulted with during the process. Healy (1998) suggests ways of overcoming this. In the first stage of the process, stakeholders representative of the community as a whole are engaged in the building of a shared vision for the future of the community with sustainable development principles.

While this

exercise is essentially a repetitive process, it has great potential in being able to draw attention to the need for change and, then in obtaining the support needed for the actualisation of the shared vision.

Accordingly, this procedure is an important

element of the initial stages of the process. After a shared vision is agreed upon, the process moves to scenario building. Scenarios differ from a shared vision in that they are “shared and agreed upon mental models of the external world….created as internally consistent and challenging descriptions of possible futures…” (van der


148

Heijden, 1997, p. 5). Scenarios provide the occasion for stakeholders to see the world through a different frame of reference, thus freeing them from established ways of thinking. Therefore, they value add to the Visioning process. Scenario planning differs from the more traditional approaches to strategic planning in so much as it acknowledges ambiguity and uncertainty in the strategic issues being examined. The relationship between this logic and the learning organisation is made clear by the following statement: The most fundamental aspect of introducing uncertainty into the strategic equation is that it turns planning for the future from a onceoff episodic activity into an ongoing learning proposition.

In a

situation of uncertainty planning becomes learning and never stops. (van den Heijden, 1997, p. 7) The application of all the aforementioned techniques hinges on the ability of stakeholders who usually act independently of (and often in competition with each other) to work together towards a mutually acceptable position on their preferred futures, while acknowledging the possible threats to this, and how these might be overcome in order to realise the preferred future. The emergent question that is of interest to this study is, to what degree do the underlying assumptions, structures and systems currently in place in the CRCST allow stakeholders to move towards mutual acceptance of a preferred future vision?

Furthermore, do these underlying

assumptions, structures and systems acknowledge possible threats to this preferred future and enable stakeholders the opportunity to see how these might be overcome in order to realise their vision?


149

6.5 Synthesis The chapter commenced with an overview of seminal contributions to understand the notion of organisational learning.

While there are individual

underpinnings to organisational learning (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), a large part of organisational learning takes place in the networks that are created between participants within the organisation (Nonaka, 1999; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Seufert et al., 1999).

In collaborative settings, there is a potential for both

organisational and inter-organisational learning to take place as a consequence of disparate individuals, representing different organisations, creating networks as they coalesce, pursuant to a common goal. With this in mind, the chapter then advanced to a discussion of the realities of policy/decision making in organisations (Cohen & Olsen, 1975, 1976; Cohen et al., 1972; Lindblom, 1959, 1979; Simon, 1957; Allsion, 1971; Kingdon, 1995). These theories were then integrated to explain how decisions and policies evolve incrementally in consideration of the limitations of participants’ cognitive processes, in unison with the effects of organisational structure and its role in creating control opportunities and problems. Consequently, problems, solutions, decision makers, and choice opportunities come together as a result of being simultaneously available so that neither the processes nor the outcomes seem to be closely associated with the explicit intentions of the participants, yet the implicit intentions were acknowledged. This was then explored in conjunction with the available literature relating to collaborative Visioning projects (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Hall, 1998; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Reed, 1997; Selin & Chavez, 1995). This showed that while necessary, the ultimate success of a collaborative Visioning project was not dependent on the development of social relationships alone. Rather,


150

it was more dependent on the engagement of stakeholders and them developing a sense of ownership of the outcomes (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998). This relates back to models of organisational learning through the recognised need to plan for a future that is uncertain. Planing implicates learning (van den Heijden, 1997). The following chapter is a synthesis of the review so far in order to provide a framework for a multi-layered analysis of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The analysis is intended to provide a foundation for mapping and interpreting that project. In so doing, the analysis provides a basis for further elaboration of a fundamental model of knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilisation.


151

CHAPTER SEVEN Synthesis

This chapter provides a synthesis of the previous four chapters. A review of the literature in Chapter Three saw the development of a definition of knowledge for the purpose of this investigation, as information with meaning.

Chapter Three

presented a brief overview of the emergent phenomena associated with knowledge acquisition at an individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational level. These phenomena were explored in further detail in Chapters Four, Five and Six, respectively. This exploration was undertaken in order to understand the emergent phenomena across all levels of learning to enable a full analysis of the ways in which collaborative Visioning networks draw on scientific knowledge in order to bring about organisational application. No comprehensive theoretical model has been published that describes knowledge acquisition across individual, group, organisational and inter organisational levels. Such a model must recognise the role of affect. This chapter presents a series of models that have been developed for use in the analysis of data collected throughout the course of the current research project. The models are presented in descendant order, depicting levels of learning at a macro level first and working to a descriptive theory of knowledge acquisition in individuals. To fully comprehend the dynamic nature of this final model it is first necessary to synthesise the information presented thus far in order to consider the interrelatedness of the levels of learning. The previous chapters have discussed in detail the process of knowledge


152

Inter-organisational Learning

Organisational Learning Group Learning

Individual Learning

Figure 7.1. The interrelated levels of learning.

acquisition at the individual, group, organisational and inter-organisation levels. The levels were presented in this order since it is apparent from the evidence presented that learning at one level cannot take place until it has occurred at the previous level; nor is it possible to understand the process of learning at one level until understanding of the process at a previous level has been attained. However, given the dynamics that occur in knowledge acquisition across all levels, the relationship among these levels is not seen as linear, but rather with each level being nested within another (see Figure 7.1).


153

Figure 7.1 acknowledges both the interrelatedness, as well as the interdependency among these levels of learning. The order in which the concentric circles are embedded within each other is not to accord more importance to any one level over another, but is intended to demonstrate the interdependent and symbiotic nature of knowledge acquisition. This depiction of learning levels provides the foundation upon which a theoretical explanation of the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in collaborative Visioning projects can be built. Chapters Four, Five and Six identified several factors that would more or less impact on the acquisition and eventual utilisation of knowledge across the four levels of learning. These factors can be classified as belonging to one of four variables that would

influence

this

process:

cognitive

processes,

social

contingencies,

communication processes, and affect. The manner in which these four factors relate to each other is displayed in Figure 7.2. As the figure shows, knowledge acquisition diffusion, and subsequent utilisation results as a function of the interactive influences of cognitive, communication and social conditions. The first helix, representing cognitive processes, would encompass all the functionally different collectives of associative networks, such as those that encompass executive and action (Pascual-Leone, 1997), logical and conceptual (Wilkes, 1997), experiential (Pascual-Leone, 1984), affective (Bower, 1981; Forgas, 1999)) and intersubjective functions that are capable of dynamically interacting with each other (Pascual-Leone, 1997).

These associative networks operate in

conjunction with personal experience, cognitive ability and the willingness, or lack thereof, to engage in more demanding cognitive processes (Cropley, 1997; Eysenck, 1997; McClelland, 1963; Sternberg, 1988).

The second helix contains social


154

Knowledge Creation, Diffusion, and Utilisation

Cognition

Communication

Social Contingencies

Affect

Figure 7.2. Model of factors influencing the acquisition, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge.

contingencies, which encompasses concerns such as group think (Janis, 1982), group polarisation (Lamm, 1988; Lamm & Myers, 1978), relationship building (Seufert et al., 1999), trust (Cvetkovich & Löfstedt, 1999; Fulop, 2002), social validation (Hinsz, 1990; Stasser, 1999), social structures (Nonaka et al., 2000; Nooteboom, 1999; Seufert et al., 1999; von Krogh, Ichijo, & Nonaka, 2000), status (Cialdini & Trost, 1998), leadership (Barling et al., 2000; Chrislip & Larson, 1994; Sogunro, 1998), power (Bendor et al., 2001; Fulop et al., 1999), and of course, politics (Cohen & Olsen, 1975, 1976; Cohen et al., 1972; Lindblom, 1959, 1979; Simon, 1957). The third helix displayed in the model represents communication issues, and includes not


155

only dissemination efforts (Backer, 1993; Caws, 1998; Goldberg, 1997; Knott & Wildavsky, 1980; Stocking, 1998), in whatever form that they might take (Argyris & Schon, 1974, 1996; Halme, 2001; Michael, 1973), but also communication of affective states (Barsade, 2001; Barsade et al., 2000; Thompson, Levine, et al., 1999; Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999) and the establishing of a common frame of reference, or attainment of mutual understanding (Augier et al., 2001; Schuetz, 1962, 1964, 1967). The final helix represents affect, which cannot be separated out from the analysis of human behaviour, since it underpins our very existence (Barsade, 2001; Barsade et al., 2000; Eysenck & Keane, 1992, 2000; Forgas, 2000a; Lazarus, 1982; Power & Dalgleish, 1997; Zajonc, 1980, 2000). The literature presented in the previous four chapters have identified these four factors as common elements of influence on the movement of knowledge across all four levels of learning. Since organisational and inter-organisational learning is dependent upon the degree to which individuals and groups that would constitute its membership acquire knowledge, it is important, not only to identify the cognitive processes that occur in individuals and groups, but also the junctures within those processes that are susceptible to the aforementioned influences. 7.1 Individual Cognitive Processes As shown in Chapter 4, knowledge acquisition is a process in which networks are continuously reconstructed from an existing network, while their similarity to or divergence from these preceding networks is at the same time negotiated (Anderson, 1995b; Lehman et al., 1995; Rumelhart, 1980; Rumelhart, Hinton et al., 1986; Thagard et al., in press; Wilkes, 1997). At each point of negotiation, some form of decision making takes place and there exists the potential for one or more of the factors mentioned to influence the decision outcome.

Using a connectionist


156

approach, the model presented in Figure 7.3 is tentatively generated from the review of the literature and identifies points of negotiation in the process of knowledge acquisition at an individual level. This model will be drawn upon to organize the empirical material presented in later chapters. As noted in Chapter Four, priming involves the processes that prepare the cognitive system for functioning (J. R. Anderson, 1996) and accordingly, is the entry point of the model. Nodes that are mobilised prior to the activation of input nodes are recognised at step two as associative networks. Information is shown as entering the network after this point and the search for relevant associations is undertaken. This is the first point of negotiation in individual knowledge acquisition as a decision must be made as to what existing schematic networks are relevant to the incoming information, and in what way. As shown in Figure 7.3, a decision is required to ascertain the degree to which additional schemata need to be mobilised. Thus the following question is asked: Are existing associations to assimilate and, in turn, accommodate new information, or is restructuring required in order to incorporate the new information? At this point, four outcomes are possible. If the decision to engage additional schemata is rejected, and the decision is incorrect, then the information presented is not incorporated into the network and is incapable of being drawn upon at a later time.

If a correct decision not to mobilise additional schemata is made, then

activated input nodes have registered a ‘fit’ with existing patterns of activation. As indicated by the broken line, an incorrect decision to mobilise additional associative networks is likely to produce the same outcome as a correct decision to mobilise additional associative networks, but only after the expenditure of unnecessary mental effort. However, in the instance where additional networks have correctly been engaged, the processes of assimilation, accommodation and décalage


157

Priming

Associative Networks Incoming Information Search for Relevant Associations

Correct Decision

Similar to Existing Schema

Assimilate

Different to Existing Schema

Accommodate

Reject

Diagnostic Options

Assimilate

Incorrect Decision



No Cognitive Change

Accommodate

No Cognitive Change

Restructure

Décalage

Figure 7.3. A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at an individual level.

become the agitators for cognitive change (Bryant, 1986; Lehman et al., 1995; Piaget, 1980; S. Strauss, 1987; Thagard et al., in press). The search for relevant associations and decisions as to how these associations are linked to the incoming information presents the opportunity for expressions of creativity.

However, it is

often within this level of cognitive processing where heuristics are employed in order


158

to reduce the cognitive load on working memory — where individuals exhibit the tendency to behave as ‘cognitive misers’ (Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Tversky & Kahnemann, 1974). This type of connectionist approach gives promise as a means to specify that by which networks acquire their contents. The proposed model provides a ‘cognitive map’ of knowledge acquisition processes at an individual level. Additionally, it enables investigation into what influences the degree of network activation and, at what point of negotiation that influence might occur in the acquisition of new knowledge.

Furthermore, if associative networks are recognised as performing

varying functions (affective, logical, planning etc.), then the proposed model takes into account the intersubjective processes that are mediated by structures that combine networks (i.e., affective and logical/conceptual). These processes will be discussed in more detail as the model is applied to knowledge acquisition and utilisation at a group level (i.e., how collectives of people acquire knowledge as a group and, in turn, utilise that knowledge in group decision making). 7.2 Group Knowledge Acquisition Through adaptation of the previous model, the process of group knowledge acquisition can also be ‘mapped’ out (see Figure7.4). In this model, the process of knowledge acquisition and utilisation in groups also begins with priming. Individuals will come to a meeting or face-to-face discussion primed, the combination and dynamics of which, as mentioned earlier, ‘set the tone’, or prime the group (Gigone & Hastie, 1993). Similar to that experienced at an individual level of learning, associative networks are then mobilised in order to prepare the collective for cognitive functioning (Levine et al., 1996).


159

Schematic Priming

Associative Networks Incoming Information

Search for Relevant Associations

Correct Decision


Assimilate

Accommodate

Group Decision Outcome

Incorrect Decision



Diagnostic Options

Information is Discounted or Ignored - No Acquisition of Knowledge

Reject

Assimilate

Accommodate



Restructure

Décalage


Figure 7.4. A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at a group level.

In this group level framework, incoming information is represented as the sharing of knowledge held by individuals with other group members, as information relevant to the formation of policy or decision making in question is presented. As noted in Chapter Five, possession of knowledge is a necessary, but not sufficient


160

condition for sharing it with others in the group (Stasser, 1999; Stasser & Titus, 1987). In addition to its possession, an individual must also be able to recall the knowledge, perceive it as relevant, and be motivated to share it (Argote et al., 2001). The knowledge held by individual members of the group is referred to as information once shared because knowledge for one individual remains information to another until it is instilled with meaning. The sharing of information by one group member then initiates a search for relevant knowledge associations among other members. This search is the first point of negotiation within the process of knowledge acquisition as a group. Is there a need to search for relevant knowledge associations among other members, or is the information to be discarded or ignored? Is that decision correct? What factors determine whether group members will imbue the information with meaning and acquire it as knowledge? Again, four outcomes from this negotiation are possible. The outcome of these alternatives is similar to those in individual knowledge acquisition. An incorrect decision not to search for additional associations among members will mean that group knowledge is not acquired as the information is discarded or ignored. If a correct decision not to seek additional associations is made, then activated associations have registered a ‘fit’ with existing group knowledge structures. As indicated by the broken line, an incorrect decision to pursue additional associations is likely to produce the same outcome, but only after the expenditure of unnecessary cognitive effort by group members. However, in the instance where additional networks have correctly been engaged, the processes of assimilation, accommodation and décalage5 become the agitators for group

5

Throughout this thesis the term is décalage used collectively for the nonsynchronous appearance of new knowledge structures. This process gives rise to certain repetitions which, may resemble returns to the existing knowledge structures (see p. 68)


161

knowledge acquisition. It is also at this juncture that the issue of creative versus straight application of knowledge and mental economy surfaces as the search commences for the associations, decisions and negotiations required to determine how existing knowledge structures are linked to incoming information. The four models presented here provide a framework through which to explore cognitive, social and affective influences in the acquisition and eventual utilisation of knowledge in collaborative research settings. These models recognise the interrelatedness of social, cognitive and affective influences (not elsewhere apparent in the literature) and thereby provide a comprehensive platform from which to analyse the data collected in the current study. Figures 7.3 and 7.4 map out the steps of knowledge acquisition in individuals and groups (respectively) and highlight the junctures where social, cognitive and affective factors may influence the process. These models provide the foundations from which to begin to develop an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project. The following chapter details the philosophical underpinnings and practical applications of the methodology employed to gather and analyse information gleaned throughout this research project.


162

CHAPTER EIGHT Method

This chapter presents the philosophical underpinnings and the practical applications of that methodology that were used to gather and analyse information throughout this research project. The overall purpose of this investigation was to develop a greater understanding of the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilisation in cooperative research settings. The first section of this chapter presents the philosophical underpinnings of the methodologies applied in this study. The second section demonstrates the practical applications of the underlying philosophies and contributions of a single case study analysis. Finally, a description of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination is given, so that the reader can develop a full appreciation of the context in which the current investigation took place. 8.1 Methodologies The ontological assumptions underpinning the present study advocate a social constructionist approach. That is, that social life is based around rules, that social realities are socially constructed and/or that social actions have meanings, and perhaps outcomes, which need to be interpreted (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Chalip, 1998; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; A. L. Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1994). Therefore, the epistemological preferences adopted throughout this research are thought to be the most appropriate to identify rules, locate social constructions, and interpret social meanings. The inductive qualitative methods employed throughout this case study were deemed best able to accomplish those ends. In Chapter One, the current research was referred to as an ‘ethnographic investigation’. While there are differing views on the definition of ethnography, the


163

common element among them is that the practice places the researcher in the midst of that which they are studying (Berg, 1998; Denzin & Lincoln, 1994).

The

ethnographic method commences with selection of a culture (in this case, is a collaborative research setting) followed by an extensive review of the literature pertaining to that specific culture, and through this review, identification of variables of interest. The ethnographer then seeks entrance to the culture of interest, which in turn sets the stage for cultural immersion of the ethnographer in the culture. It is not unusual for ethnographers to live in the culture for months or even years. To this end, the current investigation may be described as ethnographic in so much as the researcher was ‘immersed’ in the collaborative research setting for the duration of the project – the researcher was a part of every meeting and became known to all participants as ‘one of the members of the group’. Additionally, the researcher was part of the broader community (and had been for 30 years prior to this investigation) and was aware of much of the background of many of the key actors, and the relationships among them. Therefore, this study can be described as an ethnographic investigation of a single case study. Case study research involves systematically gathering enough information about a particular person, social setting, event, or group to permit the researcher to effectively understand how it functions or operates (Berg, 1998). Further to this, case study research focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings (Eisenhardt, 1989). Although the terms qualitative research and case study are often used interchangeably (e.g., Yin, 1981), case study research may employ either qualitative or quantitative data in isolation, or the two may be used contemporaneously. There has been much discussion in the literature surrounding the use of qualitative or quantitative data in the social sciences and whether these are


164

simply different methods that are appropriate according to purpose and circumstance (Berg, 1998; Eisenhardt, 1989; Pidgeon, 1996; Yin, 1981). An early criticism of qualitative research was that it lacked the rigour and objectivity of quantitative science as seen in the natural sciences. Objectivity is, however, closely linked with replication (Howell, 1992). From this perspective, objectivity is substantiated through the ability of the researcher to articulate their procedures so that others can replicate the research, should they choose to do so. Subsequent research is then able, through corroboration or disparity of findings, to testify or bring into question the objectivity or accuracy of the initial study. Findings from a single study are seldom accepted without question and additional investigations. In this light, qualitative research methods then are as objective as any other data collection and analyses strategies used by other social scientists (Berg, 1998). Additionally, the scientific benefit of the case study rests in its ability to facilitate discoveries (Shaughnessy & Zechmeister, 1990) as they permit in depth investigation of social phenomena (Yin, 1984) and are most appropriate when the purpose of the study is to realise the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of such phenomena (Eisenhardt, 1989). Stake (1994, 1995) suggests there are three classifications of case studies that arise as a function of the researcher’s purpose for studying cases. These are classified as intrinsic, instrumental or collective case studies. Intrinsic case studies are for the purpose of better understanding a single case (Stake, 1994). It is not the researcher’s intention to understand or test abstract theory or to develop new theoretical explanations.

Rather, the purpose is to better

understand intrinsic aspects of the particular case. Instrumental case studies, on the other hand, are examined to give insight into some issue or refine or develop theoretical explanation (Stake, 1994). In these situations, Berg (1998) argues that the


165

case actually becomes of secondary importance and “serves only a supportive role as a background against which the actual research questions will get played out” (p. 216). Instrumental cases are often studied in depth and many of their aspects and activities are detailed in order to assist the researcher to better understand or develop some external theoretical problem. It should also be noted that, since researchers often have multiple interests, there is no definite line drawn between intrinsic and instrumental research. More accurately, a ‘zone of combined purpose separates them’ (Stake, 1994, p. 237). Collective case studies are a detailed and broad study of several instrumental cases intended to facilitate increased understanding of or ability to theorise about some greater collection of cases (Stake, 1995). As the purpose of this current study was to develop a model of factors and procedures that may be more or less likely to enhance the utilisation of CRC research, it is most aptly described as an instrumental case study. As discussed in Chapter Two, the paradigmatic distinctions of science are largely human constructs and, in reality, the two rarely operate in isolation. The work of Kuhn (1970) is notable in that it challenged the established orthodoxy by arguing that scientific knowledge does not develop through the linear accretion of findings. Accordingly, his work spawned further investigations into the nature of scientific enquiry and method (Knorr-Cetina, 1980; Latour & Woolgar, 1979; Lynch, 1985). From these studies it was shown that scientific activity is better termed ‘constructive’ than ‘descriptive’ (Knorr-Cetina, 1981, 1995).

Scientists are not

merely engaged in the passive description of pre-existing facts about the world, but are actively engaged in formulating or constructing the character of that world through selections they make. Therefore, the arguments put forth to establish the superiority of one approach to research over another are clearly open to dispute and


166

are insufficiently supported. The findings presented in the previous paragraph and earlier in this dissertation suggest that to view available research approaches as a choice of two alternatives is empirically inaccurate, not just at the level of method, but also at that of the philosophical assumptions guiding research (Hammersly, 1996). Furthermore, to view research in this way limits the options available to researchers and obscures the range of possibilities available to them (Patton, 1987). Rather than being viewed as competing paradigms, Hammersly (1996) advocates ‘methodological eclecticism’, which is a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. He advocates this approach on the ground that “it promises to cancel out the respective weakness of each method” (p. 167). The use of multiple methodologies allows the researcher to ‘triangulate’ collected data. Triangulation refers to the cross-referencing of data obtained through different methods, each revealing slightly different facets of the same symbolic reality (Berg, 1998) — each method is a “different line of sight directed toward the same point” (p. 4). Frequently, triangulation is restricted to the use of multiple data gathering techniques to investigate the same phenomenon as a means to confirm measures and validate data (Eisenhardt, 1989). Others however, have argued that the key attribute of triangulation is not simply the combination of multiple types of data, but rather, the attempt to relate them so that the threats to validity identified in each are neutralised (Feilding & Feilding, 1986). This concept of linking data can be further extended with the view that triangulation actually represents various kinds of data, theories, investigators and methods (Denzin, 1978; Patton, 1987). Whatever forms of triangulation are used, they should not be constrained to the verification of emergent themes for, as Eisenhardt (1989) suggests, convergence


167

alone reduces confidence in the findings. In contrast, it is suggested that conflicting results force researchers into a more “creative, framebreaking mode of thinking” (p. 544), which can result in deeper insight into both the emergent theory and the conflicting results. Through acknowledgment of and investigation into divergent occurrences, it is possible to uncover the conditions in which differences occur (Potter, 1996), thereby sharpening the limits to the generalisability of the research (Eisenhardt, 1989).

From a Hegelian perspective, the acknowledgement of

supporting and non-supporting data can also lead to a synthesis of ideas beyond the boundaries of what was previously known.

In this study, data, theoretical and

methodological triangulations are used to link and establish relationships among emergent themes while also acknowledging contradictions, either in the literature or within the data.

Accordingly, the theories and models generated from this

investigation are ‘grounded’ in the data collected. The term ‘grounded theory’ (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) was coined to describe theory that is generated by (or grounded in) an iterative process of continual sampling and analysis of qualitative data obtained from concrete settings, such as unstructured data obtained from interviews, participant observation and, in some instances, archival research (Pidgeon, 1996). When approaching research without any strong prior theory, the investigator is confronted with the analytical task of sorting and extracting meaning from what is most often unstructured data. Glaser and Strauss (1967) suggest that in this instance, the researcher should work systematically through the data, generating codes to represent low-level concepts and more abstract categories or themes.

In the embryonic stages of a coding, the

researcher is engaged in a highly creative process, disciplined only by their interpretive powers and the requirement that the low-level descriptions produced


168

should fit the data well (Eisenhardt, 1989). The aim throughout this process is to foster theory generation and to “overcome the tendency for the research process to be sterilized [sic] by overly rigid methodological prescriptions” (Pidgeon, 1996, p. 77). In other words, if generating theory is not acknowledged as a main goal of a given research project, “it can be quickly killed by the twin critiques of accurate evidence and verified hypothesis” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 28). More recently, some authors have cautioned that grounded theory should not be identified merely by way of coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1994) as this approach risks dilution and is really only a form of content analysis. As Stern (1994) has commented, “as a rule of thumb, when researchers present their work as grounded theory and it is something else, that something else is usually content analysis” (p. 214). In contrast to theory building, content analysis emphasises the criteria of validity and reliability and the counting of instances within a predefined set of mutually exclusive categories. The methods of constant comparison and theoretical sampling as adopted by Glaser and Strauss (1967) clearly differentiate grounded theory from traditional content analysis. Theoretical sampling involves the active sampling of new cases as the analysis proceeds, being driven by theory with new cases being selected for their potential to generate new theory or deepen the researcher’s emergent understanding (Berg, 1998). The method of constant comparison, on the other hand, has the primary analytical task of continually sifting and comparing basic data instances, emergent categories and theoretical propositions throughout the duration of the project. Through such comparisons the researcher is sensitised to similarities and discrepancies in the data and these are intended to promote conceptual and theoretical development.


169

Several authors have described the many misconceptions surrounding the development of grounded theory (Potter, 1996; A. L. Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1994). Central to these misconceptions are the notions that grounded theory is an entirely inductive process, that it does not verify findings, and that it moulds the data to the theory (rather than the reverse). Some researchers have also argued that there is no need for their analysis to be informed by existing literature since their theories ‘emerge’ through the process of analysis and, therefore, are ‘grounded’ in the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1994). However, Strauss & Corbin warn that too rigid a conception of induction can lead to “sterile or boring studies” (p. 277). From this it is apparent that the misconception over the development of grounded theory relates to the confusion surrounding the role of hypothetico deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning that takes place in grounded theory development. Researchers that seem to concentrate on coding as an exclusive feature of grounded theory methodology, miss the importance of theoretical coding (Glaser, 1978).

According to Glaser (1978), “theoretical codes conceptualize [sic] how

substantive codes may relate to each other as hypothesis to be integrated into a theory” (p. 72). What occurs in grounded theory advancement is not hypothetico deductive reasoning per se. A researcher may draw upon existing theory, but this is with a view to increase generalisability of the findings and to assist in model building. These models are grounded to established theory, but are also capable of developing theory through observation of phenomena that emerges serendipitously. Therefore, data collection, analysis and theory stand in reciprocal relationship with each other (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1994). Further to this, much of the analysis in this study makes use of a method known as ‘thick description’ (Geertz, 1973). According to Geertz (1973), the aim of


170

the ethnographer is to observe, record, and analyse a culture. More specifically, the ethnographer must interpret signs to gain their meaning within the culture itself. Such interpretations must be based on the ‘thick description’ of a sign. The simplest act can mean different things depending on the cultural codes at work. Geertz (1973) demonstrates this through reference to the many things that a person rapidly opening and closing an eye might signify. It may be an involuntary twitch, a conspiratorial wink, or even a parody of such a conspiratorial wink. A ‘thin description’ that just says that an eye opened and closed is not enough — assuming that every twitch is just a twitch will mislead a cultural analysis. What is needed is a ‘thick description’ that separates twitches from winks and one sort of wink from another.

As

interworked systems of construable signs, culture is not something to which social events, behaviours, institutions or process can be causally attributed; it is a context, something within which they can be intelligibly — that is, thickly described (Geertz, 1973).

This form of analysis complements a grounded theory approach to

investigation. The grounded theory approach was chosen for this study since, as shown in the review of the literature, there is no comprehensive theory that identifies the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in cooperative research settings. The models in the preceding chapter are a synthesis of existing theories from several disciplines and will be drawn upon iteratively in the analysis of data. Thus, the models will serve to not only inform, but may also be informed by the analysis. One further point worthy of mention before proceeding to the description of actual data collection methods and activities is that of generalisation. The scientific perspective on generalisation holds that generalisability is only possible if the


171

elements in the sample are representative of the population of interest (Howell, 1992; Potter, 1996). Since single case study research is, by its very design a sample of one, a lack of generalisability is often a criticism of such research. Plummer (cited in Weiss, 1994) suggests that single case study research tends to be the strategy of the poor — the researcher who has little hope of gaining a large and representative sample from which generalisations may be made. While there are those who adhere to this logic (Stake, 1994), others have advocated strongly for the advantages of a single case study (Babbie, 1992; Berg, 1998; Eisenhardt, 1989; Potter, 1996; Weiss, 1994; Yin, 1984). In defence of single case study research, Weiss (1994) suggests that such research can take in as much data collection, energy and time invested in analysis as would research based on larger samples. He argues that the single case study is fundamentally different because it anchors to potential for generalisation in the magnitude of detail of the single instance.

Generalisation can then “become

uncertain (and rest heavily on the theory brought to the case) but in compensation there is coherence and depth” (p. 13) through the emergence of a single, fully understood entity. Additionally, Potter (1996) states that when case studies are properly undertaken, they should not only fit the specific case under investigation, but generally provide understanding about similar cases. Few human behaviours are unique, idiosyncratic and spontaneous (McKnight & Sutton, 1994; Weiten, 1992). Logic dictates that if this were the case, then it would be of little use to engage in any type of research on an aggregate group. As Potter (1996) suggests, if we accept the fact that human behaviour is predictable in given situations — a basic assumption of all behavioural research — then it is logical to accept that case studies have value in


172

terms of their potential generalisability. The various forms of triangulation that were mentioned in the preceding paragraphs are also acknowledged as being able to contribute to the generalisability of the research findings (Babbie, 1992; Eisenhardt, 1989; Hammersly, 1996; Pidgeon, 1996; Potter, 1996; Shaughnessy & Zechmeister, 1990; Stake, 1995; Yin, 1984). In light of what has been presented, the methodological expressions of the philosophical underpinnings of this study maximise the potential validity and generalisability of the research findings. Details of the data collection and methods of analysis are discussed in the following section. 8.2 Data Collection The data collection phase commenced three weeks after notification that the author had been awarded a scholarship, funded by the CRCST, to investigate the knowledge processes associated with cooperative research settings. Accordingly, archival data concerning the formation and early stages of the Gold Coast Visioning Project was sought and interviews with key figures in the CRCST who were involved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project were conducted.

The first weeks of data

collection were by way of field notes after briefing meetings with members of the CRCST. These members were made aware of the research project, and consent for the author to attend all meetings relating to the Gold Coast Visioning Project was awarded with the proviso that those responsible for comments made at meetings would not be identified.

This confidentiality agreement was minuted at each

meeting. Additionally, those involved in the Visioning Project agreed to inform the author of the time and location of all stakeholder meetings. Throughout the project, data were collected through participant observation of stakeholder meetings and workshops, at stakeholder interviews, and from various documents. These data


173

collection methods are discussed in detail in the following paragraphs. 8.2.1 Meetings Appendix A lists the dates, locations and participants of stakeholder meetings attended. Data from the first two meetings consisted of notes. Subsequent meetings were recorded and transcribed for thorough analysis. The majority of transcriptions were performed by the author to facilitate a greater depth of analysis than would have otherwise been possible. InfoSelect© and NUD*IST© software packages were used at various stages of data analysis as a means of ‘filing’ categorised and coded data to assist in the development of emergent themes. 8.2.2 Interviews Throughout the project, several informal interviews were held with key stakeholders, researchers and CRC members and key points were recorded as field notes.

In the final phase of the project, semi-structured interviews with key

stakeholders were conducted.

These were predominantly recorded telephone

interviews due to the time constraints of the stakeholders.

All interviewees

consented to the dialogue being taped. These tapes were then transcribed to facilitate analysis. Again, InfoSelect© and NUD*IST© software packages were used at various stages of data analysis as a means of ‘filing’ categorised and coded data in the development of emergent themes. 8.2.3 Documents Documents used in the collection of data comprised of newspaper articles, internal memos circulated within the CRC, in and outgoing CRCST correspondence, and reports circulated by the CRCST.

This type of data is of value as these

documents were not created with the intent of being used by the author as research data. Accordingly, they reflect more objectively the ‘inner world’ of the writer


174

(Berg, 1998). Given this, they may record the writer’s views, values, attitudes and beliefs relative to the investigation and may reflect the tone and atmosphere within an organisation, as well as the potential level of anxiety, stress, and morale of the writer. Such documentation may also contain information relevant to understanding the general organisational communication network used in the setting, the leadership hierarchy and other structural elements (Berg, 1998). The documents were filed in chronological order and, through triangulation methods, were used to identify disparate or confirmatory evidence for analytical purposes. CRCST members made all documents (other than newspaper articles available in the public domain) available to the author. 8.2.4 Workshops The last stage of the Visioning Project involved the Futures and 2020 Visioning Workshops. These workshops were held on 17 November, 2001 and 1 December, 2001 respectively. The purpose of these workshops was to provide a “meaningful foundation for the strategic planning process” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 52). The specific objectives of the workshops are described in the following chapter. Throughout the workshops, participants broke away into groups of three or four and worked together to articulate their views in response to questions they were asked, or scenarios they were given. The output from each group was typed on a keyboard and each of the responses of the twelve groups was displayed simultaneously on a projector screen, thereby making responses visible to all. The benefits of ‘Grouputer©’ over the traditional approach to brainstorming sessions and follow-up plenary sessions are threefold (Faulkner, 2001): First, since the specific wording of each group’s input is maintained, participants retain a greater sense of ownership of their contributions than in


175

situations where responses may be altered or distorted by the spokesperson for the group or by the facilitator of the workshop. Second, since participants are instantly informed by the responses of others, there is the potential for more creative responses through the additional information being received.

Finally, this potential for

increased creativity is further facilitated by the fact that other participants can trace none of the responses back to their source. In light of these benefits however, there is a possibility that individuals or groups may modify their views in a fashion that facilitates convergence or the emergence of consensus.

Were this to occur

prematurely it could be viewed as negative, yet, if due process had taken place (i.e., team learning had occurred), such an opportunity would be seen as an enhancement to the collaborative process. The participants’ responses were collated according to the question/scenario posed and saved as a computer file to be used in the analysis and synthesis of the responses. During these sessions, a microphone was placed behind each keyboard, enabling group discussions to be recorded on twelve different recording devices concurrently. So that comments could be traced back to their originating sector (i.e., industry, research or government), seating arrangements were recorded.

All

participants were advised prior to the workshops that their conversations would be recorded and their attendance would be deemed as consent to this.

A list of

equipment used to gather data throughout the workshops is provided in Appendix B. The tapes recorded during the workshops were transcribed by the author to allow for a greater depth of analysis than would have otherwise been possible had the tapes been transcribed by others. Again, InfoSelect© and NUD*IST© software packages were used at various stages of data analysis as a means of ‘filing’ categorised and coded data in the development of emergent themes. Participants at each of the


176

workshops are listed in Appendix C. Before moving to the analysis, it is necessary to describe the Gold Coast as a tourist destination and the local conditions that spawned the evolution of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This description will provide the reader with the necessary understanding of the context within which the current investigation took place. 8.3 Gold Coast City The Gold Coast is Australia’s sixth largest city with an estimated population of 405,000 (Gold Coast City Council, 2002b).

The city is located 32km from

Brisbane central business district (CBD) at its northern most border. Most tourism activity however, exists along the 57km stretch of beaches from South Stradbroke Island to Rainbow Bay (see Figure 8.1), commencing approximately 74km from Brisbane CBD (Geoscience Australia, 2002).

The combination of a temperate

climate, an average 287 days of sunshine annually and the pristine beaches brought the Gold Coast to the attention of holidaymakers in the early 1950s, helping it to become Australia’s premier tourist destination. Tourism is of prime importance to the Gold Coast as it provides the “greatest number of employment opportunities, earns the most revenue and is important in supporting other industries such as residential development and education” (Gold Coast City Council, p. 105).

In

1996/97, tourism activity was linked, directly and indirectly, to 25,057 full-time equivalent jobs on the Gold Coast (West & Bayne, 2002). The Gold Coast has traditionally been a private enterprise city, growing through intense entrepreneurial activity (Russell & Faulkner, 1999) and needing minimal government assistance to support this growth (Moore, 1999). Over recent years the political, economic and planning environment has changed and it has been suggested that the ‘ad hoc’ approach to development is not sustainable if the Gold


(a)

(b)

(c) Figure 8.1. Geographical location of Gold Coast City, relative to Australia (a), South-East Queensland (b) and map showing the spread of the city in relation to the coastline (c). (Gold Coast City Council, 2002a). Note: These maps are for conceptual understanding only, and therefore are not to scale.

177


178

Coast is to continue to develop as a national and international tourist destination (Noakes, Quaedvlieg, & Chatenay, 2001). In an attempt to emphasise the need for change and act as a catalyst to engender stakeholder engagement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project, the destination life-cycle model

(Butler, 1980) was used to

describe the issues confronting a maturing tourist destination (see Figure 8.2). 8.4 The Gold Coast as a Maturing Tourist Destination The destination life-cycle mode has attracted a great deal of attention and discussion as it incorporates a range of factors through a six-stage model to describe the typical life-cycle of a destination (Tooman, 1997). The six stages of the model as proposed by Butler (1980) are: Exploration Stage. At this stage there is limited and sporadic visitation by a few adventurous people with a high degree of contact with locals and use of their facilities, but with very little social and economic impact. Involvement Stage.

Increasing visitation induces some locals to offer

facilities primarily or exclusively for visitors. Contact with locals is still high and many adjust their social patterns to accommodate the changing economic conditions. A tourism destination and season emerges and advertising is initiated. Development Stage. External investment comes to the destination as a welldefined tourism market becomes emerges.

Accessibility is improved,

advertising becomes more prevalent, and local facilities are displaced by more elaborate and more modern amenities. This results in a decline in local participation and control.

Artificial attractions tend to displace original

enticements and imported labour and supplementary facilities become necessary to underpin the rapidly growing tourism industry.


N U M B E R

Rejuvenation Stagnation Critical range of elements of capacity Consolidation

O F T O U R I S T S

179

Decline Development

Involvement Exploration

TIME

Figure 8.2. Tourist Area Lifecycle model (Butler, 1980).

Consolidation Stage. The major portion of the local economy is tied to tourism and dominated by major chains and franchises. Visitation levels continue to increase, but at declining rates. Marketing and advertising efforts are further widened to extend the tourism season and attract more distant visitors. Older facilities are now below standard and mostly undesirable. Stagnation Stage. Capacity levels for many relevant factors are reached or exceeded resulting in economic, social and/or environmental problems. A peak number of possible visitations is achieved forcing facility managers to rely on repeat visitations and conventions for business. Artificial attractions supersede the natural or cultural ones and the destination is no longer considered fashionable. Surplus capacity exists. Decline (first part of stage six). Tourists are seduced by newer destinations; those remaining are mostly weekend or day visitors. Tourism establishments


180

become replaced by non-tourism facilities as the area disengages from the industry. This disengagement results in even less appeal for visitors and the remaining facilities become less viable. Local involvement may increase again as the cost of facilities decreases along with the market decline. The destination either becomes a tourism ‘slum’ (Faulkner, 2002) or finds itself free of tourism activity. Rejuvenation (second part of stage six). A dramatic change in the resource base is established. Either a new set of artificial attractions are created or a a previously unexploited natural resource is established (Butler, 1980). Tooman (1997) suggests that any given destination may not follow these stages precisely. However, many researchers conclude that the general trend holds. Empirical studies undertaken to establish the applicability of the life-cycle model have failed to reach a consensus on the issue (Choy, 1992; Cohen, 1982; Weaver, 1990). One argument against the life-cycle model is that the evolutionary pattern is not certainly, or even frequently, going to follow the biological pattern of birth, growth, decline and death (Tooman, 1997). In a basic product life-cycle, the product remains static while marketing efforts and strategies adapt to each stage. If a product were to be changed, the cycle would begin anew. With tourism, the destination (or product) undergoes an evolutionary process of continual transformation in response to changes in demand and supply. From this perspective, any pattern of development may be possible and the life-cycle model is, at best, a diagnostic tool after the fact (Choy, 1992). Given that the Gold Coast Visioning Project is an attempt to reinvent and reposition a product (destination) in decline, the model is of heuristic value, no matter which viewpoint is taken.


181

8.5 Background of the Gold Coast as Tourist Destination The Gold Coast has long been acknowledged as Australia’s premier tourist destination (Stewart, 2001; Moore, 1999). This position was achieved through a fortunate combination of natural assets and intense entrepreneurial activity that ensured the destination’s prominence in Australia’s tourism development (Russell & Faulkner, 1999). The popularity of the destination is reflected in its international market performance, which has shown strong growth from the mid-1980s, the time when Australia became more appealing as an international destination (Faulkner, 1990), through to the late 1990s (see Figure 8.3). Initial inspection of Figure 8.3 depicting trends in international visitor numbers, may suggest that the destination is beginning to experience a decline over the later years. The decline however, has been attributed by some, to the impact of the Asian financial crisis rather than the destination’s long-term decline. While this view might seem encouraging, it remains a source of concern as it highlights the vulnerability of a destination that is heavily reliant on a single source market (Faulkner, 2002). As shown in Figure 8.4, the Gold Coast’s performance in the domestic market has been more inconsistent and is more difficult to identify patterns in long-term trends in declining visitation rates. While trends in visitor numbers tend to be the commonly used indicator of the stage reached in a destination’s development, Faulkner (2002) suggests that to use this indicator in isolation would be naïve. Several other indicators have been identified as useful in such an assessment (Butler, 1980; Cooper, 1990; Haywood, 1986; Morgan, 1991) and their relevance to the Gold Coast are summarised in Table 8.1. A consistent downward trend in the duration of stay of both international and domestic tourists, increased importance on ‘organised mass tourism’, aging infrastructure and aggressive discounting of room rates resulting in high volume /low


182

International Visitors to the Gold Coast 1200

Visitors '000

1000 800 600 400 200

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

1989

1988

1986

1985

1984

0

Year

Figure 8.3. Trends in International Visitor Numbers to the Gold Coast (Faulkner, 2001)

4000

Domestic Visits ('000)

3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0

Figure 8.4. Trends in Domestic Visitor Numbers to the Gold Coast (Faulkner, 2002).


183

yield market are indicators that the Gold Coast could be in early signs of stagnation. Additionally, the destination’s biased dependence on built attractions (i.e., theme parks) and the increased emphasis of the convention sector that is thought will follow the completion of a new convention centre could also be deemed as indicators of stagnation.

However, as Faulkner (2002) suggests, such developments could

demonstrate rejuvenation strategies rather than stagnation. On the basis of the aforementioned indicators, it was concluded that the Gold Coast is a mature destination showing some signs of early stagnation (Faulkner, 2002). It was also recognised that one of the underlying causes of stagnation is the sluggishness of ingrained management /planning practices and structures, which may have succeeded in the past, but have become increasingly misaligned with the changing environment (S. Noakes, personal communication, 18 April, 1999; Faulkner, 2002).

Consultation with the Gold Coast City Council (the local

government authority), key industry stakeholders and the CRCST, gave birth to the concept of a systematic and comprehensive audit of the Gold Coast. It was decided that the results of this audit would feed into a shared vision for Gold Coast tourism which was to be based on principles of sustainable development. After agreement


184

Table 8.1 Indicators of stagnation.§ Area of destination performance

Indicators

Changing markets

• Growth in low-status, low spend visitors and day visitors; • Over dependence on long holiday market, and lack of penetration of short-stay market; • Emphasis on high-volume, low yield inclusive tour market • A decline in visitors length of stay; • Type of tourists increasingly organised mass tourists. • A declining proportion of first time visitors, as opposed to repeat visitors; • Limited or declining appeal to overseas visitors; • High seasonality

Emerging newer destinations

• •

Infrastructure

• Outdated, poorly maintained accommodation and amenities; • Older properties are changing hands and newer properties, if they are being built are on the periphery of the original tourist areas; • Market perceptions of the destination becoming over-commercialise, crowded and ‘tacky’; • Tourism industry over-capacity; • Diversification into conventions and conferences to maintain numbers; • Large number of man made attractions, which start to outnumber the more natural attractions that made the place popular in the first place

Business performance

• Declining profits of major tourism businesses • Lack of confidence in the tourism business community; • A decline in the elasticity of advertising (lower return in terms of increased visitors per advertising dollar investment)and an increase in process elasticity; • Lack of professional, experienced staff;

Social and environmental carrying capacities Institutional

•

environment

•

• •

• •

Competition from emerging newer destinations; The destination is well known, but no longer fashionable;

Visitor levels approaching or exceeding social and environmental carrying capacities; Local opposition to tourism as the resort’s residential role increases; Local government reorganisation (amalgamation) diluting the political power of resorts in larger authorities; Demands for increased operational efficiency and entrepreneurial activity in local government; Short term planning horizons in local government owing to financial restrictions and a low priority given to strategic thinking; Shortage of research data.

§ Indicators in bold italics apply to the Gold Coast on the basis of existing data (Faulkner, 2002)

was reached on the scope of the research to be undertaken, engagement by key


185

stakeholders achieved and appropriate funding sought, the Gold Coast Revisioning Project was established (See Appendix D for list of key stakeholders). Accordingly, the Gold Coast Mayor officially launched the Gold Coast Revisioning Project on 18 October, 1998 (“Y2K Plan”, 1998). The project was subsequently renamed the Gold Coast Visioning Project and the events leading up to this name change are discussed in greater detail in Chapter Nine. The Gold Coast Visioning Project was an integrated program of research, which aimes to provide a strategic assessment of future options for tourism development on the Gold Coast (CRCST, 1999). A series of 12 research projects were undertaken in order to provide a systematic and comprehensive overview of the current status of Gold Coast tourism, with many of the indicators previously tabled being tested empirically. A detailed approach to the project and a schedule of completion was produced in diagrammatic form and is displayed in Figure 8.5. A summary of the research projects and their major findings are summarised in Appendix E.

The project culminated with the final 2020 Vision Think Tank

workshops that were hld on 17 November, 2001 and 1 December, 2001 (See Appendix C for list of participants). The aim of these workshops was to combine insights obtained from the research projects with principles of sustainable tourism development to produce a shared vision for the Gold Coast’s tourism future. The shared vision was to be used as a framework for generating a set of issues, core values, and principles that could be used to evaluate the future development options for the Gold Coast. This was to be achieved by identifying options for tourism development in the context of the future scenarios, and then evaluating these in terms of the vision, associated core values, and principles. Further to this, it was proposed


Schedule

186

1 Markets

Planning (Scoping Study)

1998

Destination Audit

Infrastructure

Environment

Economic Impacts

.

1 A series of interdisciplinary research projects on the current status of aspects of Gold Coast tourism.

Product Quality Social Impacts

Hinterland

2 Megatrends Analysis

Gold Coast Destination Barometer

Futures Workshop

3

4

.

2 A survey of stakeholders aimed at canvassing perceptions of the health of the destination.

.

Visioning Workshop

3 A consolidation, review and synthesis of published scenarios regarding longer term social, economic, political, technological and environmental trends; and tourism demand/supply implications.

5

Sustainable Tourism Development Principles

Core Vision

The environment

The community

Tourism Market

Tourism Infrastructure

The urban setting

SWOT Analysis and Options

Tourism Industry Consumer markets Products Distribution systems Tourism infrastructure

Policy & Planning Community Environment Economic Development Infrastructure/urban planning Government/planning

(Distillation of Issues) Values/Principles Planning Objectives/Goals (Guide to the future)

Figure 8.5. Gold Coast Visioning Process (Faulkner, 2002)

Regional Economic Synergies

.

4 Development and assessment of scenarios aimed at establishing a consensus among stakeholders on the most likely future environment for Gold Coast development.

.

5 The visioning workshop will provide a vehicle for engaging stakeholders in a systematic and focused process for Articulating a vision for the Gold Coast's tourism future; and Evaluating options and actions for achieving this vision.


187

that participants in the workshops would arrive at a consensus on preferred tourism development options consistent with the vision and the actions/approaches necessary for this to become a reality (Faulkner, 2002). As knowledge creation and utilisation in collaborative research settings is an ongoing process, the period of data collection in this investigation extends to the presentation of the final report by the CRCST to stakeholders. Based on the comprehensive destination audit, the report was to detail the preferred future vision for the Gold Coast and the actions needed to achieve this. The Gold Coast Visioning Project has provided the ideal context for a case study analysis of the ways in which the CRC research process can most efficiently blend research with practice. This is due to the magnitude of the project in terms of the amount of research intended for organisational application that was undertaken – the findings of which were to underpin the vision of a preferred future for the region. Additionally, the time frame in which this collaborative project occurred enabled this longitudinal investigation of the processes involved in a tri-lateral arrangement of knowledge production. These characteristics provide an opportunity to develop an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project, and how they evolve over time.

The results of this investigation will then serve to inform

sociological enquiries into this emerging form of science production. The following chapters present an analysis of the data collected throughout this project.


188

CHAPTER NINE The Gold Coast Visioning Project

The following chapters present the analyses and results of this study in order to develop a fundamental understanding of the sociology of tri-lateral arrangements of science as described in the triple helix model (Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996) and aspired to in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. It was noted in Chapter Two that in a triple helix system, where each sector may relate to the other two, networks and hybrid organisations among the helices will emerge through the overlay of communications. Indeed, it is these networks and hybrid organisations that facilitate the emergence of a collaborative vision. To achieve this objective, any organisation emerging from this intersection of disparate parties must detail what the purpose of its existence is, and the outcomes it hopes to achieve in order to justify such existence. Additionally, there would need to be directives in place that would guide the emergent organisation to that end point, and bring order out of the chaos that is inherent in a triple helix system. This chapter details the objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project and the ways in which the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) proposed to achieve those objectives. In conclusion, an analysis of the methods chosen by CRCST leadership considers the bases upon which particular methods were chosen.

Chapter Ten then compares these espoused plans and

objectives with what actually occurred, and discusses the impact these outcomes had on the ways that meetings and workshops were held.

Ideals that were not

implemented, or that were compromised by socio-political factors are examined, and the influence this had on dissemination efforts and the eventual outcomes of the


189

project are considered. To this point, the thesis has been structured in a fashion that has highlighted the multiple levels of analysis required to understand a collaborative Visioning project. Accordingly, the following chapters describe the events that took place throughout the term of the Gold Coast Visioning Project in order to provide a contextual understanding of these effects at inter-organisational, organisational, group, and individual levels.

The final chapter provides a discussion of the

theoretical and practical implications of the findings, and presents a model of processes that may maximise the organisational application of research that is intended to underpin and inform decision making. Obviously, organisations themselves do not create directives, goals or objects; such outcomes are achieved by those who constitute its membership. Throughout the remainder of this thesis, unless otherwise stated, where an organisation is mentioned, that notation shall be taken to refer to the members of the particular organisation who were directly involved with the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This form of reference will include organisations such as the Gold Coast Tourist Bureau (GCTB), Tourism Queensland (TQ), the Gold Coast City Council (GCCC), and the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST). Such an approach achieves a dual purpose. First, it will serve to maintain the confidentiality agreement entered into by the author through the increased anonymity of broad reference. Second, it will make the writing of the thesis less cumbersome. While certain CRCST documents may be attributed to a single author, they are endorsed by broad organisational membership, and accordingly, are cited in this spirit. The chapter commences with an overview of the underlying rationale for the Gold Coast Visioning Project.


190

9.1 The Gold Coast Visioning Process 9.1.1 Rationale for the Visioning Approach The overall aim of the Gold Coast Visioning Project was to combine insights obtained from research with principles of sustainable tourism development to produce a shared vision for the Gold Coast’s tourism future.

The underlying

rationale for this was that in contrast to more traditional planning approaches, the aforementioned approach adopted by the CRCST would highlight opportunities, as opposed to obstacles and constraints. Thus, this would engender a more proactive and positive approach to the future (Faulkner, 2002). More specifically, the rationale for the visioning approach was based on the principles listed in Table 9.1 9.1.2 Objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project The shared vision generated through the Gold Coast Visioning Project was to be used as a framework for generating a set of issues, core values and principles with which to evaluate future development options for the Gold Coast (Faulkner, 2002). Specifically, these objectives were: • to provide a systematic and comprehensive overview of the current status of Gold Coast tourism, covering such considerations as market position and competitiveness, and environmental, economic and social impacts; • to develop scenarios for future global, national and local socio-economic, technological and environmental conditions, and assess the implications of these trends at the Gold Coast destination level; • to combine insights from the above with the principles of sustainable tourism development to produce a shared vision for the Gold Coast’s tourism future; • to utilise the shared vision as a framework for generating a set of issues, core values and principles for evaluating future development options;


191

Table 9.1 Rationale for the Gold Coast Visioning Project (taken from Faulkner, 2002, p. 19). • A vision provides framework for choosing appropriate responses and for cooperative action. External events (including changes in government policy agendas at all levels, international developments and random disasters) have the potential to profoundly affect the competitiveness of the Gold Coast as a tourism destination, and thus the direction of tourism development. While destination stakeholders may have little control over these events, a long-term shared perspective (a vision) is necessary for not only determining how they respond, but also for ensuring they we respond in a coordinated and effective way. • Without a vision, the destination will become locked into the past. That is, an incremental approach, where decision makers focus on responding to immediate contingencies in a piecemeal fashion, leads the destination to a position where the options available for coping with longer-term eventualities are progressively reduced. • Having a vision provides a means for ensuring that day to day decisions are informed by a longer-term perspective. Conversely, by creating a more structured, strategically focused and shared framework for individual enterprises and organisations to operate within, a vision contributes to ensuring that decision makers at all levels take longer term considerations into account in their day-by-day decisions. • A vision provides a catalyst for building a collective memory and organisational learning system at the destination level. A modest up-front investment in a visioning process, with associated planning and evaluation systems, avoids the need to think through every crisis situation from scratch. Such an approach not only creates a readiness for the unexpected, but also it facilitates the transition from individual insights to collective/institutional action, and establishes an institutional learning and memory system that reduces the prospects of repeating past mistakes and/or re-inventing the wheel (van der Heijden, 1996). • A vision that is consistent with the sustainable tourism development principles provides a vehicle for incorporating international ‘best practice’ models into the Gold Coast strategy.

• to identify options for tourism development in the context of the future scenarios, and evaluate these options in terms of the vision and associated core values and principles, and;


192

• to arrive at a consensus on preferred tourism development options consistent with the vision and the actions/approaches necessary for this vision to become a reality.

Since the Gold Coast Visioning Project was fundamentally concerned with generating directions for tourism development in the longer-term, the principles of sustainable tourism development (as mentioned in Chapter Two) provided the philosophical underpinnings for the planning process. That is, “only those options for the Gold Coast’s tourism future that satisfy the needs of residents and visitors alike, preserve the cultural and natural assets of the region, and are economically viable” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 4) should be considered. For the CRCST, this stipulation implied two basic obligations. First, for sustainable tourism objectives to be realised, a participatory model involving the meaningful engagement of the community, industry stakeholders and relevant government agencies would need to be embraced (Murphy, 1994). This is so that that a true consensus on the directions of future development, and the actions necessary to achieve this, may be developed (Faulkner, 2002).

Furthermore, this participatory model implied a ‘whole of destination’

approach, integrating tourism with other sectors of the economy, in conjunction with an appreciation of the inter-relationships between socio-cultural and environmental dimensions (Faulkner, 1998). A shift from a ‘destination marketing’ to a ‘destination management’ approach was therefore promoted (Moore, 1999; Faulkner, 2002). 9.1.3 Techniques Employed The effective implementation of the whole of destination approach, through a model of participation, extends beyond mere consultation to a point of meaningful engagement. To achieve this level of engagement, the CRCST (Faulkner, 2002)


TECHNIQUES

Learning Organisation Approach

193

Visioning

Collaboration Scenario building

PERSPECTIVES Whole of Destination approach

PRINCIPLES

Community Participation Model

Sustainable tourism development

Figure 9.1. A framework for destination strategic planning and management (Faulkner, 2002).

suggested a synthesis of four techniques:- visioning, scenario building, a learning organisation approach, and collaboration. These concepts, as summarised by the CRCST, are presented in Table 9.2, and the means by which they would interact to facilitate the desired objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project are represented in Figure 9.1. The more specific guidelines were obtained by combining the aforementioned techniques with the “selective adaptation of an analytical framework for assessing local collaborative arrangements” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 40), as developed by Bramwell and Sharmen (1999). In Chapter Six, it was noted that the fundamental difficulties that seem to be associated with collaborate Visioning projects relate to a lack of


194

Table 9.2 Techniques to achieve meaningful stakeholder engagement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. (adapted from Faulkner, 2002). Technique Visioning

Scenario Building

Learning Organisation

Collaboration

CRCST Summary The engagement of stakeholders in the building of a shared vision for the future of the destination that is consistent with sustainable tourism development principles. While this exercise is of necessity an iterative process, its potential role as a vehicle for highlighting the need for change and galvanising support for the approach based on the principles and perspectives outlined above means that this technique is an important ingredient of the early stages of the process. As it is focused on the future, the shared vision needs to be attuned to a collective understanding of the environment and how it is changing. It is important, therefore, that the visioning stage is complemented by a scenario building process, involving an exploration of possible futures that is informed by both a strong research platform and the variety of perspectives stakeholders can contribute. Intrinsic to both the visioning and scenario building components is the notion of stakeholders becoming engaged in a process that ensures they are continually focused on enhancing and expanding their collective awareness and capabilities. Learning and the building of a knowledge base that is accessible to all stakeholders therefore need to become an integral part of the organisational structure at the destination level. The application of all of the above techniques hinges on collaboration in the sense that they require a range of stakeholders, who normally act autonomously of each other, to work together towards mutually acceptable position on their understanding of emerging challenges, preferred futures for the destination and how these might be realised. The management of the tension between autonomy and cooperation is therefore central to both the development and implementation of the strategy.


195

stakeholder engagement in the process. This lack of engagement primarily results from the over involvement of the facilitating agency (Helling, 1998) and/or a lack of ownership of the outcomes (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Halme, 2001; Helling, 1998) as a result of the degree to which stakeholders have been involved and consulted during the process. The CRCST sought to overcome these difficulties through a series of guidelines designed to underpin the Gold Coast Visioning Project. These guidelines revolved around the broad areas of scope and intensity of collaboration and the degree to which consensus emerges. 9.2 Scope of Collaboration In terms of the scope of collaboration, the CRCST (Faulkner, 2002) stated that participants should be representative of all relevant stakeholders. The CRCST defined stakeholders as individuals, groups or organisations who are affected by the issues under consideration. In the context of the Gold Coast Visioning project, stakeholders comprised tourism operators, other members of the business community, environmental and other special interest groups, the resident population and public sector agencies. In order to encourage stakeholder commitment to the process, the benefits of involvement by participants needed to be clearly articulated and communicated to those invited to participate. The CRCST (Faulkner, 2002) cited Helling (1998, p. 224) when they stated that “stakeholders must see a compelling reason” for participation and “must believe that their interests will be protected and advanced through the process” (p. 41). However, they conceded that in promoting the case for participation, it was “essential that unrealistic expectations regarding the outcomes are not fuelled” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 41). The CRCST recognised that acceptance of any solution is enhanced when


196

those “who must abide by it are included in designing the solution” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 41). Therefore, stakeholders, who had a role to play in the implementation of directives to move the destination towards a preferred future, needed to be involved in the project from its inception. It was also thought that this level of involvement would increase the likelihood of ownership of the plan and, subsequently, its successful implementation. Finally, the CRCST noted that care should be taken to ensure that the stakeholders selected to represent particular groups were capable of accurately mirroring the interests of that group. Consequently, to overcome the problem of biased representation, supplementary consultative and general survey methods were employed. 9.3 Timing and Intensity of Collaboration The CRCST deemed it necessary to provide all stakeholders with an opportunity to make a meaningful contribution to the planning process, therefore all stakeholders needed to be involved from the outset. The CRCST felt this would avoid the “risk of entrenched positions becoming an inhibiting factor and stakeholder perceptions of being presented with a fait accompli” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 42). An additional directive to guide the process stated that background information should be made available to stakeholders so that they might make informed contributions to discussions, and that they should be fully informed of the collaborative process “to ensure that it is fully accountable to them” (p. 42). In Chapter Five it was shown that emergent knowledge is most likely to evolve in situations where groups have time to learn to interact effectively and develop appropriate task performance strategies, and where there is some diversity in opinion among group members (Argote, 1999).

To ensure that issues were


197

effectively debated and knowledge building at a collective level was facilitated, the CRCST thought it important to provide opportunities for direct interaction among stakeholders. The underlying reasoning for this was that through such interactions, progress would be made towards consensus building and the collaborative relationships required for implementation would be fostered. Further to this, and in alignment with the principles of the learning organisation approach presented in Chapter Six (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), the collaborative process would need to be structured in a way that cultivated openness, honesty, tolerance and respect in the relationships among participants. The ability of participants to understand and learn from each other’s arguments was deemed “central to the building of the collective knowledge base necessary to move towards a consensus” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 42). The remaining guidelines put forth by the CRCST related to the degree to which consensus should be achieved through the collaborative process. 9.4 Degree of Consensus The CRCST (Faulkner, 2001) acknowledged that not all stakeholders would agree to the final position reached through the Gold Coast Visioning process to the same degree since stakeholders, by design, would represent a diverse range of “often diametrically opposed value systems and … there are limits to the degree to which these can be reconciled” (p. 28). The report detailing these guidelines stated that, if the Visioning process arrived at a point where it appeared that absolute consensus had been realised, then such an outcome may actually suggest that the discussion has avoided ambiguities and contentious issues and, at best, has focussed on common ground, a concept discussed at length in Chapter Five. Additionally, the CRCST thought it necessary for participants to understand the importance of divergent thought, and that they should possess realistic expectations regarding the potential


198

for a consensus being achieved. The CRCST thought that adherence to the aforementioned guidelines would achieve partial consensus with all stakeholders and that consequently a degree of ownership of the outcomes would emerge. For the Gold Coast Visioning Project to realise its objectives, ‘across the board’ ownership was important, but ownership among those upon whom ultimate implementation of the eventual plan rests, was deemed essential (Faulkner, 2002).

This outcome was dependent on achieving

stakeholder involvement. 9.5 Methods for Achieving Stakeholder Involvement The

most

effective

methods

for

achieving

community/stakeholder

involvement were identified as stakeholder interviews and meetings, focus groups, workshops, surveys covering the resident population and tourism industry enterprises, and advisory committees (Faulkner, 2002).

With the exception of

surveys, each of these methods promoted interaction among stakeholders.

As

discussed in Chapter 5, it is only through the opportunity for group members to interact that an inter-subjective world becomes within reach of group memebers through common experience (Schulz, 1964). For groups to acquire knowledge, all members must gain an appreciation of each others thoughts, beliefs and values so as to further develop and extend their own. The overall approach as depicted in Figure 8.5 was to be achieved in several ways. First, interviews with over 100 key representatives of stakeholder groups were conducted to determine stakeholder perceptions about the status of the tourism industry on the Gold Coast. Additionally, key issues relating to the challenges and concerns calling for stakeholder attention in their consideration of the future of the Gold Coast were identified. This exercise, called the ‘Scoping Study’, served to


199

inform a refined research agenda, the results of which would underpin the Visioning process. The eventual audit process involved a series of 12 integrated research projects aimed at overviewing the current status of Gold Coast tourism in terms of social, economic (including tourism marketing) and environmental considerations. This research base was intended as a ‘front-end’ input to the visioning process (Faulkner, 2002). The objectives, findings, and issues emerging from the findings were synthesised by the CRCST and are listed in Appendix E. The CRCST stated that each project was “driven by a ‘reference group’ consisting of representatives of relevant stakeholder groups [so as to] ensure that these projects were attuned to the concerns of those stakeholders who have a legitimate interest in focus of the research” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 46). A survey of tourism industry stakeholders (‘Tourism Industry Barometer’) was conducted. This was to obtain a broad indication of industry perceptions on the status of tourism development on the Gold Coast, individual visions of the future and preferred options for tourism development. A parallel survey of residents (‘Social Audit’) was directed at obtaining similar input from the local community’s viewpoint. Finally, two one-day workshops were conducted, both with key stakeholder group representation. The aim of the first workshop was to produce a consensus on likely future scenarios affecting the Gold Coast, which was to be informed by a review of global tourism demand/supply trends (mega-trend analysis). The second workshop (involving participants from the first workshop) was aimed at constructing the actual vision for the future Gold Coast and the strategies required to achieve that vision (Faulkner, 2001). This was to be achieved through the following steps: •

After discussion of the basic principles of sustainable tourism with


200

stakeholders, an agreed ‘provisional’ core vision would be put forward. Dimensions for the elaboration of this core vision were to be identified at this point in order to provide a structure for future analysis. • The outcomes of the scenario generation audit processes generated in the first workshop would be revisited.

This was so that the core issues

confronting the future of Gold Coast tourism could be identified. In this process, the ‘provisional’ core vision and the proposed dimensions would be used to structure a series of SWOT analysis so that issues for closer analysis might be drawn out. • The issues identified in the aforementioned stage would be classified so that they might be systematically analysed and extend upon the various dimensions of the vision. This elaboration would “include the articulation of a set of values, principles and benchmarks for evaluating future development options”. (Faulkner, 2001, p. 31) • The provisional core vision was also to be re-visited at this stage, as it was thought that the stakeholder group by this point would have reached a new level of understanding of the issues that would necessitate refinement of the vision. The revised core vision and the elaboration of its dimensions would then be used as a framework for evaluating alternative Gold Coast tourism development options. • A series of statements, articulating principles and benchmarks for preferred futures in each specific dimension of tourism development would then be produced by participants. These statements would either be consistent with the draft core vision or be able to justify recommendations regarding modifications to the core vision. A consensus on the embellishment of the


201

core vision would then be sought. • Participants would then produce an interpretation of the threats, challenges and opportunities affecting the achievement of the vision and, in the light of this, an assessment of the feasibility of each aspect of the vision. The contributions received at this stage would then be synthesised, and again, consensus would be sought. • Finally, consensus view on key planning, policy and management issues associated with the vision and the actions required to achieve the vision would be established. This was so that all participants would be aware of the future steps in the process and the role they would play in the development and realisation of strategic plans that would guide the future evolution of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination.

This process aligns with the findings of Healy (1998) and van der Heijden (1997), as presented in Chapter Six. Their research suggests that the aforementioned processes adopted by the CRCST would be most likely to draw attention to the need for change and obtain the support needed for the actualisation of the shared vision. Furthermore, these processes would facilitate the development of shared and agreed upon mental models of the external world, or scenarios that provide the occasion for stakeholders to see the world through a different frame of reference, thus freeing them from established ways of thinking. Subsequently, the additional knowledge individuals, groups and organisations acquire may be applied to the vision building process. For the CRCST, the approach to the development of a vision for the Gold Coast outlined above involved two additional caveats. First, the processes engaged


202

in the development of the vision are as important as the end-state. That is, “the process of developing the vision should be instrumental in developing an informed and considered dialogue among stakeholders, to such an extent that the destination plan and management framework will represent not only a consensus among this group, but also it will reflect a thorough and rigorous analysis of the issues” (Faulkner, 2001, p. 32). Second, the visioning statement produced at the end of the process should be presented in such a way that it would provide a “meaningful foundation for the strategic planning process” (p. 32). The Visioning exercise itself was intended to be a catalyst for bringing about permanent changes in the structure of the destination planning and management process “that are necessary for the Gold Coast to become a ‘learning organisation’ at the destination level” (p. 32). To quote the CRCST: The Visioning project should be instrumental in establishing a systematic planning regime that is supported by a strong research base and a rigorous evaluation system. Such a regime will underpin the institutional learning process and memory that is so essential for creative adaptation to the challenges of the future and reducing the prospect of repeating past mistakes or re-inventing the wheel. (Faulkner, 2001, p. 32)

This chapter so far has provided an outline of the ideals and objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project and the ways in which the CRCST chose to operationalise them. Additionally, the theoretical and logical rationale driving the guidelines adopted by the CRCST have been described. What was often not explicit in the description of methods chosen by the CRCST was a specification of how these


203

guiding principles would be operationalised. The final part of this chapter gives an analytic account of what the CRCST did and did not operationalise. The concluding section attempts to explain why the CRCST made the choices it did. 9.6 Analytic Synthesis The clear statement of ideals and objectives was an attempt by the CRCST to make transparent to all stakeholders the agendas and role of the CRCST in the Gold Coast Visioning Project.

However, under close investigation, what becomes of

interest is that which was left unsaid. For example, although not stated explicitly, the statement that “the collaborative process should be structured in a way that cultivated openness, honesty, tolerance and respect in the relationships among participants” (Faulkner, 2001, p. 28) acknowledged the potential influence of social contingencies. However, no mention was made of what form that structure would take, nor how it would be realised.

Additionally, an oblique reference was made to social

contingencies when it was said that stakeholders, by design, would represent a diverse range of “often diametrically opposed value systems and … there [would be] limits to the degree to which these can be reconciled” (p. 28), but again, no mention was made of how that would be managed. This is in spite of the emphasis placed on partial consensus (at the least) being obtained with all stakeholders. The CRCST gave a comprehensive definition of the intended scope of collaboration — individuals, groups or organisations that are affected by the issues under consideration.

Furthermore, to avoid the “risk of entrenched positions

becoming an inhibiting factor and stakeholder perceptions of being presented with a fait accompli” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 27), it was decreed that all stakeholders needed to be involved from the outset. Yet this objective is somewhat meretricious, given that the CRCST had engaged in negotiations with the Gold Coast City Council (GCCC)


204

for twelve months prior to the public announcement of the project. A GCCC resolution (C96.0625.039), passed on the 26 June, 1996, stated that the council would not participate in the CRCST. After a CRCST presentation to the Coordination Committee of GCCC on 4 November, 1997, a Council resolution (C97.1104.050) stated “… that the CEO [of council] be authorised to prepare a report for council on options for forming strategic and other partnerships with the CRC.…” One month later (4 December, 1997), a letter from the CEO of CRCST referred to a meeting the previous day and stated that the CRCST would commence work immediately keeping with the proposal of Council’s CEO and that it would have a working title of ‘Revisioning Gold Coast Tourism: Sustainable Tourism Development and Planning in a Large Mature Destination’. Three months later (10 February, 1998) a Council resolution (C98.0210.004) stated that Council should liaise with the Gold Coast Tourist Bureau (GCTB), the Queensland Travel and Tourism Council (QTTC) and the Australian Tourist Commission (ATC) regarding the relevance and priorities of the project. Therefore, the focus and direction of the project was being planned without engagement of the stakeholders who would be affected by the issues under consideration. Additionally, the CRCST noted that for stakeholders to be ‘meaningfully engaged’ in the project, there would need to be a compelling reason for participation clearly articulated to them, and that they must believe that their interests will be protected and advanced throughout the process. This was not achieved through the statements made just prior to and at the public launch of the project which suggested that the ‘past ad-hoc attitude to tourism development would not work in the future’ and a more sensitive approach was needed to reconcile the demands of a large residential community and a huge tourism industry. Furthermore, at the launch of


205

the Gold Coast Visioning Project the Chairman of the Board of the CRCST stated: Those who dislike any challenge to their comfort zones may ask why we need to change at all, why we need to revision the future. The answer is simple — if we do not act now to harness the benefits of research to map the years ahead we face the certainty of decline.

Whether or not these statements were correct is not of interest here. The point is that each of those statements were couched in negative terms and may have been taken by some to imply that what had been done in the past was wrong. Furthermore, the statements made by the CRCST implied that if stakeholders did not become engaged in the process of creating a new vision then their ‘interests’ were in threat of decline. The underlying rationale for the Gold Coast Visioning Project was that a collaborative Visioning project would highlight opportunities as opposed to obstacles and constraints. The CRCST promoted the Gold Coast Visioning Project as an opportunity to develop a destination management approach, but the manner in which they did this failed to acknowledge the political ramifications that might occur through differing interpretations of their statements. Therefore, the approach taken by the CRCST was not consistent with a fundamental tenet of a learning organisation approach – respect for and understanding of differing world views. This is supported by evidence presented in the following chapters. The CRCST stated that a reference group consisting of representatives of relevant stakeholder groups would drive each project. This was so that these projects were attuned to the concerns of those stakeholders who have a legitimate (a term used by the CRCST) interest in the focus of the research. This implies that some stakeholders may be less ‘legitimate’ than others. The scope of collaboration aspired


206

to by the CRCST was to include tourism operators, other members of the business community, environmental and other special interest groups, the resident population and public sector agencies. The fact that the stakeholders were not represented evenly is not consistent with CRCST directives that specified the scope of collaboration to be attained if the Gold Coast Visioning Project was to produce optimal outcomes. This suggests that stakeholders who were invited to participate may have been seen to be more legitimate than others. The following chapters present evidence to support this suggestion. The CRCST stated that stakeholder engagement was important, since a more sensitive approach was needed so that the demands of a large resident population might be reconciled with those of a huge tourism industry. Again, the method chosen by the CRCST did not reflect a learning organisation approach. As noted in Chapter Six, the disciplines of a learning organisation involve establishing a shared vision and team learning. These concepts require individuals to bring their ‘frames of reference’ to the surface so that they might be held up to rigorous scrutiny and engage in ‘learningful’ conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy. Although not explicitly stated by the CRCST, a learning organisation approach necessitates double-loop learning. Double-loop learning at a group level requires the learner to reframe, to develop new conceptions and attitudes, to cognitively re-label existing classifications and amend standards of judgment . The CRCST alluded to the need for two-way communication when they stated surveys alone are inadequate “because they do not allow the degree of information sharing, collective learning and participatory decision making that is required” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 45). The one-way communication inherent in a survey would not occasion the double-loop learning that occurs when an individual or group challenge the underlying values of an idea,


207

assumption, or concept. From this perspective, the approach taken by the CRCST meant that the extent to which the needs of the resident population were addressed would be compromised. The potential impact of socio-political factors is not explicitly acknowledged in the directives adopted by the CRCST, nor is any plan or approach to how these might be managed. Instead, the CRCST stated that the collaborative process itself “provides a means of managing the tension between cooperation and the autonomy organisations require in competitive environments to the extent that, by definition, collaboration implies a mechanism for joint decision making among autonomous and key stakeholders of an inter-organisational domain” (Faulkner, 2002, p. 32). Chapters Five and Six demonstrated quite clearly that a collaborative process itself does not manage the tensions that will emerge when disparate parties are brought together pursuant to a common goal. Rather, these implicit tensions are managed by firstly acknowledging their existence, and then seeking to navigate through the affective, cognitive and communication influences inherent among them. The questions to ask here are: What was the impact of the aforementioned assumption on the socio-political factors inherent in this, or any collaborative arrangement? As a consequence, to what degree did these socio-political factors deny or compromise the realisation of ideals and objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project? In relation to earlier comments in this chapter, what effect did the lack of broad stakeholder involvement in the embryonic stages of the project have on the eventual outcomes? What response did the early media releases and statements made about the need for the Gold Coast Visioning Project generate in industry and government sectors?

What impact did these responses have on the direction the

Gold Coast Visioning Project took? Finally, what effect did the direction the Project


took have on its eventual outcomes?

208

These questions will be addressed in

subsequent chapters, but at this point it is appropriate to ask why some of the methods chosen by the CRCST were specified in operational detail while others were not. Additionally, it is important to understand why the objectives specified and the practices which followed were inconsistent with the things that the CRCST were doing at the very early stages of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Why some methods were operationalised to the extent that they detailed what was to be achieved, but not how may be explained if approached with notions of social action put forth by Durkheim (1933). That is, that as society engages in increasing specialisation of tasks, it creates a rise in inividuisation — there becomes greater disparity among thoughts, beliefs and values in those who comprise that society (Durkheim, 1933). Therefore, collective acceptance is more easily attainable when notions are presented as higher order concepts. The more specific the dialogue surrounding how that concept is actualised, the more members of society will defect from accepting that notion, as individual values and belief systems collide with the more intricate, lower order concepts. In this instance, the CRCST methodology was sufficiently vague to engender endorsement from stakeholders, yet, since how these higher order concepts would be achieved was not operationalised, it created the potential for unanticipated socio-political factors to impact upon the process. The effect this lack of specific operationalisation had on eventual outcomes Gold Coast Visioning Project and the management of the project itself, is discussed in the following chapter. Although there appeared to be a discrepancy between espoused objectives and practices the CRCST engaged in, it could be argued that this resulted from the fact that much of the research used to underpin these objectives was not available at


209

the commencement of the project as it was not published until eighteen months to two years after the project was conceptualised. However, this gives rise to another somewhat obvious observation; many of these objectives were not clearly stated at the outset of the project, but rather, were used to engage stakeholders in the final phase of the project, which was the creation of the 2020 Vision of Gold Coast development. The impact this had on the emergence and subsequent acceptance of a preferred future for the Gold Coast is discussed in greater detail in the following chapters. The Gold Coast Visioning Project was ultimately, an exercise to provide a strong research base so that the future of the Gold Coast might be guided through a whole of destination approach to long-term destination management. The following chapter examines the divergence and/or convergence between the espoused methods for achieving this objective, the influence the socio-political factors (inherent in a triple helix arrangement) had in the adherence to, or departure from these guidelines, and the ways in which emergent influences impacted upon learning at inter organisational and organisational levels. Subsequent chapters investigate this same issue at group and individual levels, respectively. A synthesis of the results is presented in Chapter Thirteen, and the theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed in the final chapter.


210

CHAPTER TEN Organisational and Inter-organisational Learning Analysis

The following three chapters draw upon the models presented in Chapter Seven in order to analyse the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilisation in a collaborative Visioning project so that a fundamental understanding of these processes might be obtained. As was shown in the previous chapter, the methods chosen by the CRCST6 to achieve the objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project were sufficiently vague to engender support, but the ambiguity surrounding how these objectives might be achieved facilitated an environment where socio-political factors could impact upon events and outcomes in an unanticipated manner. This chapter commences with a brief historical overview of the means by which stakeholders were engaged. In doing so, comparisons of espoused versus actual processes are made and the ways in which CRCST management responded to the unintended events that took place throughout the project, are analysed. The degree to which these responses aligned (or misaligned) with the espoused objectives is reflected upon, and the impact this had on the process and outcomes of the Gold Coast Visioning Project is discussed.

An analysis of how these socio-political

factors influenced inter-organisational and organisational learning is offered, and the degree to which a learning organisation evolved throughout this process is also

6

As in the previous chapter, unless otherwise stated, where organisations are mentioned, it shall be taken to refer to members of the particular organisation who were directly involved with the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This will serve to maintain the confidentiality agreement entered into by the author through the increased anonymity of broad reference, and will make the writing less cumbersome. Whilst certain CRCST documents may be attributed to a single author, they are endorsed by broad organisational membership, and are cited in this spirit.


211

considered. To contextualise the political influences that emerged, it is necessary to first understand how the major part of the funding for the Gold Coast Visioning Project became available. 10.1 The Launch of the Gold Coast Visioning Project On February 16th, 1998 the Gold Coast City Council (GCCC) passed a resolution (Council Resolution C98.0210.004) “to refer to budget deliberations a recommendation to provide funds to the CRC for the amount of $100,000 per year, for the three financial years from 1998/99 to 2000/01”. On June 3rd, 1998 a Council resolution decreed to “include an amount of $100,000 in the 1998/99 Budget as a contribution to the CRC with funding to be covered by a marginal increase in the Tourism Levy” (Council Resolution C98.0603.006). Accordingly, the Mayor of the Gold Coast officially announced the Gold Coast Revisioning project on October 19th, 1998 (Baildon, 1998). Speaking at the official launch the Mayor stated: The council is proud to establish a strategic alliance with the CRC and has backed a plan to provide $300,000 over the next three financial years to support the vital work being done by this Centre. Research is paramount to the future success of tourism in this city. Strategies and decisions can only be successful if they are built on accurate research … on facts. We must have an accurate reading of where we are on the tourism map before we can plot the way ahead to the desired future…. Importantly, this CRC-generated program will be driven in consultation with major stakeholders, and this is a defining point – all stakeholders must be involved and committed to achieving the vision.


212

The CRCST announced the appointment of a project manager through a media release on 21 October, 1998 (Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, 1998).

In this media release (October, 1998) the CRCST stated the

appointee “aptly fits the bill in what we are looking for in this vital exercise to ensure that the Gold Coast … can maximise the undoubted benefits that come from properly researched, planned and managed tourism”. The media release stated that, since the appointee brought to the project “a particular industry input to the academic research process”, a fundamental role of the project manager would be to encourage and facilitate industry engagement and foster relationships among stakeholders. Additionally, the appointee would be responsible for obtaining industry support through financial backing of the project. The project manager was engaged on a consultancy basis rather than in a position of full-time employment. To fully understand the dynamics that occurred at an inter-organisational level, it is important to understand the structure of Gold Coast tourism management that existed at this time. At a local government level, issues relating to tourism fell under the economic directorate of the Gold Coast City Council (GCCC). The Gold Coast Tourism Bureau (GCTB) was seen as being representative of local industry, but its primary focus was the marketing and promotion of the Gold Coast as a premier tourist destination. It was clearly articulated by council officers and CRCST members at meetings that the role of the GCTB did not encompass strategic planning. Although the Bureau was heavily funded by the GCCC, the board of directors comprised tourism industry members, and day-to-day management was a function of the Chief Executive Officer. At a State government level, Gold Coast


213

tourism was represented by a government funded body named Tourism Queensland7 (TQ). Again, the role of TQ was one of marketing and promotion of Queensland tourism with any research carried out by TQ underpinning any decisions pursuant to this role.

Within TQ there was a department that focused exclusively on the

branding, imaging and positioning of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination. The other group to acknowledge is the theme park operators. The four major theme parks within the Gold Coast region generate substantial income and the advertising budget of this group is such that they strongly influence the image of the Gold Coast at a domestic level by the sheer volume of advertisements run to promote their operations. For example, according to claims made at various meetings, 50% of advertising representing the Gold Coast in Southern states of Australia during 1997 – 1999 was generated by the theme parks. Therefore, from the standpoint of market positioning of the Gold Coast, the dominant advertising influence is that of the theme parks. Furthermore, the interests of the theme park operators may not necessarily align with that of the Gold Coast as a destination. Thus, at the destination level, Gold Coast tourism was not ‘managed’ per se, but rather promoted through marketing activities — a point clearly stated by the CRCST from the first public announcements relating to the Revisioning project (as it was named at the time) (Bartsch, 1998; Deiley, 1998). Prior to the public announcement of the project, two studies were undertaken. The results of these studies were intended to create focus and direction for the subsequent destination audit. The first study (Tideswell, 1998, see Appendix E) was a market analysis of visitor trends in domestic and international tourism activity on In 1998 this government body was named the Queensland Travel and Tourism Council (QTTC). The QTTC was later renamed Tourism Queensland (TQ) and for continuity shall be referred 7


214

the Gold Coast. The second, a Scoping study (Moore, 1999, see Appendix E), was promptly undertaken to identify key planning development and marketing issues currently facing the Gold Coast corridor, identify core stakeholder groups, identify data gaps and research priorities, and determine outcomes to meet the expectation of stakeholders. These two research projects were completed within six months of the official launch of the Revisioning project. During this time the CRCST devoted much time and energy to engage TQ and the GCTB with the project with each organisation being representative of State government, and local industry respectively. The CRCST also sought to engage the theme park operators, but these operators did not approach the Gold Coast Revisioning project with much enthusiasm. In a letter dated 16 October, 1998, one of the operators stated that they would not be financially supportive of the Revisioning project since it was felt that the CRCST did not have a clear sense of direction.

The letter questioned the

usefulness of the information that would be produced through the research. As mentioned in Chapter Eight, the Marketing Analysis showed a long-term trend of decline in the performance of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination and generally supported the need for a long-term approach to destination management. The results of the Scoping study

(Moore, 1999) showed that the Revisioning

exercise was not well understood by stakeholders and that ownership of the process needed to be fostered urgently (see Appendix E). Further to this, the results showed that the project should be named Gold Coast Visioning Project, as there was strong stakeholder resistance to the term ‘Revisioning’. The report also showed that there needed to be greater stakeholder commitment to the project, particularly at State throughout this thesis as TQ.


215

government and tourism operator levels, and that a ‘user friendly’ public consultation process needed to be implemented. Finally, the report suggested that in order to achieve stakeholder engagement, there needed to be a clear articulation of what direct economic or social returns would be delivered by the strategic plans (i.e., increased visitor expenditure, employment growth, etc). The results of these two reports were released in early April, 1999. Prior to the release of these reports, the CRCST members involved in the Revisioning project called a meeting to discuss the findings of the Scoping study. The first issue tabled was the naming of the project, whereby it was suggested that the name should be changed from ‘revisioning’ to ‘visioning’, due to the negative connotations that the term revisioning brought about in the minds of industry participants. Although one person stated “… what’s in a name? – if that’s what is needed, then change it”, there was reluctance by others to do so. The hesitancy to rename the project was based on the following passionate display of reasoning: The name revisioning indicates that there is a need for a new framework in the planning and management of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination. To ignore that is not challenging the mindset that exists in industry now. This rationalisation was countered by: The name is actually about communication. If we do not engage the private sector at the start then we will fail.

It was decided at the meeting that the issue would be tabled for discussion with stakeholders at the steering committee meeting to be held the following month. The level of industry engagement was discussed but predominantly in terms of


financial commitment to support the program.

216

It was noted that there were

expressions of interest by industry participants, “but no dollars are forthcoming yet”. Additionally, questions were raised by meeting participants as to the accountability of the CRCST and the level of commitment that it should have to stakeholders. One person present at the meeting said, Paying stakeholders have a right to be at the table and be at the first line of what we do. If they pay, they get first preference. If industry are engaged, then the CRC is happy to tailor make some of the research output for them.

In recognition of the policy and planning void relating to strategic planning of Gold Coast tourism, concern was raised by those present at the meeting over the eventual ownership and implementation of findings. One participant stated passionately that “It is essential that someone or some body takes ownership of it to drive it through.” The response to this was, “Be careful – we are the CRC, not TQ. We produce research and deliver to the private sector. We do research they cannot and will not do so that the private sector can make informed decisions.” The resistance of the GCTB to become engaged was noted. One participant said, “It is imperative that we keep it to the issues and not the personalities.” The CRCST acknowledged the importance of industry engagement, but the comments of some suggested this was primarily in terms of providing financial viability for the project. Furthermore, the justification and rationale for the name ‘revisioning’ was seen as crucial to the overall integrity of the project and the ‘independence’ of the research undertaken. In other words, funding from industry was desired, but such funding did not give industry the ‘right’ to compromise the


217

integrity of the research. What was more apparent, however, was the frames of reference that were brought to bear throughout the discussion. During the meeting, one participant argued that the project name was reflective of the fact that “ … the ways in which the tourism had operated in the past were no longer appropriate”. Furthermore, it was reasoned that for the “ … Gold Coast to maintain its position in tourism markets, future management decisions [needed] to be underpinned by rigorous research.” The adherence to principles of research integrity by this person reflected a great depth of procedural knowledge and the display of emotion during the discussion revealed the value they placed on these principles. The fact that this person stressed the importance of the overall integrity of the project demonstrates that they did not fully appreciate that the acute contextual knowledge that industry and local government members possessed would need to be fed into the research projects if they were to produce outcomes that were relevant to these parties. Additionally, this person was not able to fully understand that it was essential for the contextual knowledge held by would-be end-users of research to be brought into the project in order to foster engagement and, in turn, maximise the utilisation of resulting research findings.

The comments made by this CRCST

representative suggest that their theories-in-use, or frame of reference they held did not allow them to acknowledge that the active involvement of the other parties would not necessarily compromise the scientific rigor of the research. The impact of such disparate frames of reference became more apparent as the project progressed. Through quotes that were recorded on several occasions, it is appropriate at this point to reinforce what the actual role of the CRCST in the Gold Coast Visioning Project was to be. The CRCST stated clearly that “the role of the CRC is to stimulate linkages that will promote the uptake of knowledge.” Additionally, they


218

stated that if they were “ … to be seen as advocates for policy change, [then the CRCST would] lose credibility with research.”

Throughout the data collection

period, this point was reinforced on twenty-four occasions at stakeholder meetings and CRCST briefings and meetings. In these early stages of the Gold Coast Revisioning project it became evident that socio-political issues would absorb much of the management focus of the CRCST. This was made evident through the responses and subsequent issues that arose through early media releases of research findings that emerged from the Market Analysis and Scoping studies. Throughout the months of January to April 1999, four separate one-page summaries of issues relevant to the project and/or project research outcomes were distributed to industry, community, government, media and university contacts by faxstream.

There were approximately 200

recipients on the faxstream list (approximate figures supplied by the CRCST). In late March 1999, the CRCST released the outcomes of the Market Analysis study. The faxstream recipients were sent a summary of findings that suggested the Gold Coast was experiencing a period of decline. The fax stated that the research data spanned a ten year period so as to indicate certain patterns, and underlying long-term trends in the destination’s performance, rather than a snapshot ‘state of the industry’ in 1999. Shortly after this fax release, a series of newspaper articles reported on the more negative findings of the Market Analysis study. Headlines such as “All That Glistens is not Necessarily Gold” (Southgate, 1999) provoked much angst among industry members. On 6 April, 1999 a key stakeholders meeting was called to “ … discuss where [the project] was at [and to] determine whether there [was] a clear definition of what [research] projects are to be and not to be.” The discussions at this


219

meeting displayed the extent of the political issues emerging as a result of disparate forms of thinking. This was first evidenced through the debate surrounding the outcomes of the Market Analysis study. The GCTB voiced strong concern over the findings stating, “You are drawing inferences and making analogies from outdated statistics. The period of data you have chosen is not relevant.” The CRCST strongly defended the use of the statistics and explained that a ten year period was chosen to reflect long-term trends and absorb time oriented effects (e.g., the effects of industrial action, etc). At this point, both parties were speaking in raised voices and their body language had become defensive as they leant toward each other, adding emphasis to the point they were making. The GCTB would not accept the line of reasoning the CRCST used to justify the use of the data and maintained the position that the statistics used were not relevant, due to the dynamics of the industry. At this point two factors became apparent. Present at the meeting was another industry member who was supportive of the Revisioning project due to a personal belief in the need for strategic decisions to be founded on accurate research. This industry member had become engaged in the project through a close business relationship with the Chair of the Project. The point of interest is that this person brought closure to the discussion with the following statement: I think we need to avoid conflict over the relevance and validity of data otherwise all our time is taken up on arguing over the quality and validity of the data rather than the information produced.

The fact that further discussion on the topic was circumvented brings rise to the second point. Had the dialogue encouraged the GCTB to state why they held the


220

view they did towards the report, then those present at the meeting may have realised that the underlying reasons were fuelled by an emotive response to another, more deeply rooted issue. That is, that certain members of the GCTB perceived the CRCST to threaten that which they had previously held in esteem. This perceived threat held by the GCTB manifested itself in several displays of active antagonism towards the project, not the least of which was the issue surrounding the name of the project. When this issue was tabled for discussion the CRCST stated: There was actually careful thought given to the name. The solutions of the past won’t work for the future and we need to ‘revision’ and rethink the future ways of doing things. The name is actually meant to take people out of their comfort zone, its meant to shake their cage…. There must be independence and objectivity in our research … I mean, are we rolling over the first time an objection comes along?

The response of the GCTB suggested the underlying sources of their perceived threat when it was stated (forcefully): The term re-visioning infers that previous methods were wrong. If they were so wrong the Gold Coast wouldn’t be where it is today.

Although general consensus was that the project be renamed the ‘Gold Coast Visioning Project’, an accurate understanding of the contextual issues is needed to fully appreciate the relevance of this incident to this investigation and the subsequent impact that it had on project outcomes. Senior management within the GCTB had held their current position for the last nine years and had no formal training prior to


221

moving into that role. As mentioned earlier, the GCTB received substantial funding from the GCCC and the position of the GCTB relative to Council was made clear from a statement made by a senior council employee: The GCTB is funded in large part by the council and should be reviewed and monitored, but it isn’t. Because of the relationship between [name withheld] and the Mayor, he often communicates directly to the Mayor and circumvents a lot of communication and their associated processes. Several council employees admitted in confidence that they thought the way in which this person first came to the position, and the fact that he remained there was as a consequence of his relationship with the Mayor. Statements justifying the need for the Gold Coast Visioning Project implied, rightly or wrongly, that Gold Coast tourism had not been managed effectively in the past. That the destination had evolved to the level it had was as a consequence of a fortunate combination of natural assets and a sequence of visionary entrepreneurs whose initiatives ensured that this destination was always at the cutting edge of many innovations in Australian tourism development (Russell & Faulkner, 1999), rather than good management. The need for change in practices and in mindsets was promoted strongly by the CRCST. What became evident is that the GCTB took the Revisioning project to be a voice stating that what they had done over the last ten years was wrong and, accordingly, this brought into question the appropriateness of the practices and operations of the previous years. Additionally, since the CRCST were promoting the findings of the Scoping study that highlighted a planning and policy void, but not how that would be overcome, the GCTB saw the current structure and role of their


222

organisation to be in question. In the absence of formal tourism education and training, some members of the GCTB lacked an understanding of the role of research and how it could be fully utilised in strategic decision making tasks. As a result, the GCTB were never fully engaged in the process — something which precluded the active involvement of many industry members. In order to understand fully the processes taking place, it is useful to refer back to the principles required of organisations in order to become learning organisations. An objective of the CRCST was to achieve meaningful engagement of stakeholders through visioning, scenario building, and collaboration. In a manner consistent with the principles required of organisations to become learning organisations (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), the collaborative process would need to be structured in a way that cultivated openness, honesty, tolerance and respect in the relationships among participants. This was not evident in the way the CRCST promoted the Gold Coast Visioning Project and their attempts to engage stakeholders. Firstly, some members of the CRCST were willingly confrontational in their approach to promote the need for the Gold Coast Visioning Project – the name itself was, as the result of careful deliberation, designed to provoke controversy, to ‘shake’ people out of their comfort zones. To remove people from their ‘comfort zones’ means individuals must move into the ‘unknown’ and into states of uncertainty. As mentioned in Chapter Five, it is the subjective state of uncertainty that gives rise to the affective states of distrust, suspicion, threat and fear (Kramer et al., 1993). Further, it is the skilful management of these affective states that has a profound effect on the overall outcome and effectiveness of a collaborative project. Since change gives rise to uncertainty, the CRCST may have generated a more


223

cooperative response from stakeholders had they not promoted the need for change so strongly. Rather, the campaign to foster stakeholder engagement may have been more effective if the CRCST had celebrated the achievements of the past that had propelled the Gold Coast to its position as a premier tourist destination. In this light they could then have demonstrated how active engagement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project presented the potential for the destination (and in turn its inhabitants) to achieve to greater heights in economic, social, and environmental terms. Stated differently, collaborative engagement may have been achieved more easily if stakeholders were asked to embrace something that was positive rather than ‘let go’ of something they had previously held in esteem, or were institutionally dependent upon.

The aforementioned socio-political influences demonstrate the

pervasive nature of affect and how it is involved in the social construction of the destination.

Accordingly, communication efforts and interactions between the

CRCST, the GCTB and other industry participants were characterised by inherent tensions for the remainder of the project. The dynamics of GCTB involvement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project changed in July 1999 when a member of the CRCST and an industry participant actively engaged in the project were appointed as GCTB board members. These appointments meant that the Gold Coast Visioning Project received greater exposure to industry members of the GCTB, however, due to the politics generated within the GCTB, much of what was presented continued to be met with underlying resistance. In July 2001 the aforementioned industry member was appointed Chair of the GCTB, and it was at this point that those who had previously displayed antagonism toward the Gold Coast Visioning Project endorsed the project. Initially this change in attitude was met with suspicion by the CRCST as evidenced by an internal memo


224

that asked “ … tell me why I smell a rat!!.” In hindsight, the same individual commented: It’s not surprising really. He knows he has got to keep the numbers around the board to stay where he is … Its all about power … and he knows how to work it. The delicate nature of managing the socio-political factors was highlighted further over the discussion that revolved around the media reporting of the first two reports. The GCTB questioned the need for the CRCST to engage the media, as illustrated by the following comment: “I am having difficulty in accepting CRC belief in the need for media exposure”. It was agreed at the meeting that media releases needed to be more carefully managed by the CRCST if negative reporting of research outcomes was to be avoided. The events over the following three weeks were catalysts in changing the course of the Gold Coast Visioning project. Two local newspapers ran articles on the findings of the Market Analysis and Scoping8 studies on the 16 and 17 April, 1999 (Hubbard, 1999; Weston, 1999, respectively). The articles focused on the negative aspects of the reports stating that the Gold Coast was perceived as ‘tacky and overcrowded’ and reported the decline in domestic visitation rates to the region. Given that it was minuted at the 6 April, 1999 stakeholders meeting that “media comment would be more controlled” and that the age of information provided in the reports would be identified to the press, it is not surprising that industry members responded aggressively. In a letter dated 27 April, 1999, the GCTB stated that, given the decisions made and minuted at the last meeting: It came as a surprise and disappointment to see follow-up interviews


225

with [CRCST participants] twice now reconfirm their position on the state of domestic tourism based on their report…. Despite what was minuted, it is clear that [the CRCST] are still determined to present a biased opinion to the media…. On expressing my concerns to [name of CRCST participant withheld] in that this process would alienate the industry, I was informed that the report was accepted by a number of government departments now and had government funding and as such didn’t really require industry’s backing. The industry is increasingly concerned with the current media process, as is the Bureau. As it would appear that CRC Tourism will continue with the process, I would appreciate you [sic] comment on: 1. The industry relevance to the process, and 2. The requirement for the [GCTB] to be involved in the advisory process, given the disregard to our opinion…. We are fully supportive of the need for timely and accurate information … however, we have concerns that the current process has lost direction.

The response of the CRCST was clearly articulated in correspondence (28 April, 1999) stating that: In the future there will be no direct media commentary on our projects unless authorised by both [the CEO and Chair of the CRCST]. As well, any requests for interviews from the media will be referred directly [to the CEO and Chair]. Others involved in the 8

See Appendix E for a review of all CRCST reports


226

CRC project will only be authorised to talk to the media on the express authority of [the CEO and Chair]…. I apologise for the impression that we have not been following the spirit of the resolution of the last steering committee, but I assure you that from now on, the letter and spirit of that resolution will be adhered to.

This situation was accentuated by an article that appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald on 8 May, 1999 suggesting that the “ … tacky Gold Coast had lost its holiday lustre” (Roberts, 1999). The response from industry this time came in the form of a letter from one of the theme park operators. The letter, dated 13 May, 1999 questioned again the validity of the findings from the Market Analysis study. Additionally, the letter stated: Uninformed articles like the one attached serve to destroy the great work the Council and the business community is doing for the Gold Coast. The CRC Revisioning (now Visioning) has been meeting for almost two years…. The bottom line is that until the CRC for Sustainable Tourism can demonstrate that it has a clear direction resulting in useful information then this organisation will not be supportive financially. This is a position made very clear initially and in correspondence dated 16 October 1998.

The response of the CRCST in a letter dated 14 May, 1999 continued in the same vein of the previous correspondence of the CRCST concerning media releases. In an internal memo dated 15 May, 1999, the CRCST noted that: One had the impression that [the tension between the Surfers


227

Paradise Chamber of Commerce and the GCTB] has contributed to the approach the journalist took in presenting the article…. However, I think we have failed to identify the implied as well as the stated, needs of key industry individuals and organisations including the [GCTB] who warned of the way media would focus on the negative aspects of the [Market Analysis study] when it was first released…. This situation has led to misunderstandings and possible conflict for which I certainly was not prepared, although I have always identified its potential.

At this point the CRCST were faced primarily with three project management options.

First, they could foster engagement through persuasion (engagement

established on the benefits that participants would realise). Second, engagement could arise through coercion (participation would decrease the likelihood of experiencing negative consequences).

Third, they could opt for taking greater

ownership of and control over the direction of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. It was the last of these three options the CRCST adopted as it became increasingly apparent that industry engagement was going to present continuing demands and challenges to the management process. Drawing on Delahaye’s (2001) approach to organisational functioning it is evident that the ‘shadow’ system had gained greater power over the ‘legitimate’ system. In this imbalanced state, a great deal of energy would then be required to restore balance to ensure survival of the organisation. The energy needed to reinstate equilibrium would present a drain on limited human resources and present the likelihood of ultimately distracting from achieving the objectives of the project. Therefore, the CRCST chose the option that, although not


228

optimal, was practical. The CRCST chose an option that would minimise levels of uncertainty, as the more they allowed this participative process of ‘fractious’ stakeholders, the more the uncertainty rose. While the decision of the CRCST was not optimal in terms of fostering the collaborative networks inherent in a tri-lateral arrangement such as a Visioning project, the choice was pragmatic under the circumstances, as management of unanticipated issues demanded increased attention and expenditure of energy. Furthermore, because the CRCST saw the changes that were needed to occasion the ‘holistic strategic management approach’ to destination management as occurring at a governmental policy level, they pursued the level of engagement of the GCCC and Queensland State government policymakers. This level of engagement was achieved at the expense of industry engagement and was evident in a newspaper article that appeared on 20 May, 1999 (“Y2K Plan”, 1999). The article stated that “key Surfers Paradise business people were ‘offended’ at a lack of representation on the newly formed [CRCST].” The vice-president of the Surfers Paradise Chamber of Commerce was quoted in the article as saying: “We are key stakeholders and many of us have been left wondering what is going on”. The CRCST was quoted as saying that they were “ … unaware of the concerns and would be happy to discuss any concerns as soon as possible”. At this point in time the direction of the research papers to underpin the Gold Coast Visioning Project was all but formalised and invitations to this group of industry stakeholders to participate in the project resulted in minimal levels of involvement. In order to fully appreciate the significance of this, it is appropriate to reflect further upon the aforementioned findings. What was occurring here was an increasing tension developing between entrepreneurs who already had a vision. These visions infrequently aligned mainly


229

because the needs or wants of the theme park operators would be different to say, tourist operators or retailers in Surfers Paradise. Depending on where different stakeholders were positioned, and what their frames of reference were, they would have different needs and wants.

For example, theme park operators might be

concerned with ways of holding patrons within their establishment for a day, whereas retailers in Surfers Paradise might be more concerned with improving the ‘town’ image to encourage initial visitation and, in turn, return visitation. Conversely, tourism operators may be more concerned with developing tours or events that create for them a niche market. Since the various stakeholders were not given the opportunity to discuss among themselves their respective needs in an open forum at an early stage of the project, potential stakeholders did not know what was wanted and from whom. Therefore, they were not aware of the agendas driving the project and what specific outcomes the project might deliver. The single-loop communication seen in the interview process used to identify stakeholder needs did not occasion the opportunity for stakeholders to develop an understanding of, or learn from, each other. At this point it is useful to illustrate the extent of ownership and control the CRCST gained over the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Prior to the final 2020 Visioning Workshop, a meeting was held between two CRCST employees to plan the agenda and format the workshop would take. During a discussion over the workshop segment in which participants would identify those who would implement the action required to realise the ‘vision’ for the Gold Coast future, the following dialogue took place: Participant 1 Who does take this forward, just for interest’s sake?


Participant 2 The unit — in council, which was part of the key to getting the unit up and running. Participant 1 Ookaaay – and then we need to get… Participant 2 (Demonstrating the following statements as a model being drawn on a whiteboard) Well what we've got now is the two key, well the key bodies will be GCCC Tourism Unit and the GCTB … oh, and REDAC (Regional Economic Development Advisory Committee). And what we've got is, we've got the chair of REDAC locked in; we've got the Tourism Unit locked in; the counsillor waivers but [because of his position in council] he influences this (indicating the tourism unit) and a few of the councillors are quite supportive. Over here we've got the board [of GCTB], oh well, when I say the board we have the chairman and a couple on the board, but [name withheld] is not committed though — that's our weak link. So, hopefully there's enough grunt in there (highlighting the circles to represent the Tourism Unit and REDAC) to carry this forward. The key to this is the Tourism Unit as an effective instrument. And what that means is some sort of integrated regional tourism strategy to achieve a vision in another 20 years. Participant 1 It’s a lot of work Participant 2

230


231

You wont get this one [the ‘weak link’ at GCTB previously identified] to change his spots. You won’t change that until you get a change of leadership, but that's fine — the big end of town is locked in and realistically, as you would appreciate, it’s more a tourism unit function rather than a marketing unit function. Participant 1 So you got GCCC which is the Tourism Unit… Participant 2 Plus REDAC, and REDAC is critical because in the REDAC process with all these sectorial strategies, when it comes to tourism, the Visioning project fits nicely in there. Participant 1 Well, seemingly, they're the three players — the GCTB … the council’s Tourism Unit and REDAC.

What this demonstrates is that these organisations were identified a prori to the workshop. How this influenced the outcomes of the workshop will be the subject of analysis in the following chapter. The results presented to this point have focused on the socio-political factors that emerged and the way in which these were managed. The results so far have focused on the early stages of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, since the response by the CRCST at this stage impacted greatly on the way the project was managed for the remainder of its term. The results have shown that the first few months of 1999 saw the CRCST embrace a ‘crisis control’ form of management, rather than risk management. Had the guidelines set out by the CRCST been operationalised in a way that identified the


232

potential socio-political influences and their possible impact on the process from the outset of the project, this situation may have been avoided, or at least managed with a greater awareness of possible consequences. An internal CRCST memo, dated 15 March, 1999, suggested that the CRCST should “learn from past mistakes … and improve risk management strategies.”

Proposed responses, in line with a risk

management approach, were suggested in the memo as ways in which the CRCST could: Modify project objectives; use alternative communication methods; use alternative ways of managing the project; increase resources to plan risk management strategies; increase interdependency; avoid obstacles by increasing flexibility, and re-assess project structure and plan. However, the memo also stated that : Subjective risks are harder to identify since they usually concern people and their interaction in the project and, as such, are much more difficult to quantify.

To better manage the collaborative process, the CRCST chose to focus collaborative efforts with those who would formulate policy and would, therefore, have (what the CRCST perceived to be) the greatest ability to bring about the necessary changes to underpin future destination development with principles of sustainability.

The controversies that arose in the first half of 1999 were not

managed optimally if a truly collaborative arrangement was to emerge — disparate views occasion the opportunity to expand one’s frame of reference and engage in team learning, a tenet of the learning organisation approach (Senge, 1990; Senge et


233

al., 1994). Rather, controversy and contentious issues were avoided to maintain the ‘harmony’ through which consensus might arise. The results demonstrate how the negative emotions that result from discordant relationships may impair effective negotiation, as those with an acrimonious history focus more on their individual outcomes than do those with a congruous or neutral history (Loewenstein, 1996; Loewenstein et al., 1989). The management of the process thus became paramount to the CRCST and frequently overwhelmed the objectives of the project. Again, while this outcome may not be optimal, it was a pragmatic choice in a situation that quickly became a ‘political minefield’. These findings are well described by the model presented in Figure 7.2. That is, social contingencies, individual cognitive responses and communication factors are all embedded within, and influenced by affective responses to social, cognitive and communicative acts. Accordingly, knowledge creation and eventual utilisation results as a function of the interplay of these four factors. Of interest to this investigation is the impact that these socio-political factors had on organisational and inter-organisational learning in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. 10.2 Levels of Organisational and Inter-organisational Learning Chapter Two described how, in a triple helix model, hybrid organisations emerge at the interfaces of the overlapping institutional spheres of industry, government and science. In collaborative research projects such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project, it is hoped that, as stakeholders come together to pursue a common goal, an organisation within its own right emerges. In the case of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, it was anticipated that this emergent organisation would develop to the extent that it would become a ‘learning organisation’ at the destination level.

In Chapter Six it was noted that the generative organisational learning


234

required in a collaborative Visioning project is not so much about cultural change as it is the establishment of a culture unique to the organisation that evolves. While this was aspired to, the way in which the project was managed by the CRCST circumvented this process. As the CRCST moved away from cooperative research to what Delahaye (2001) calls ‘legitimate’ systems of command and control, the ‘organisation’ that emerged reflected the culture of the CRCST – it was not a unique culture that developed as disparate stakeholders came together. In terms of an organisational learning approach (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994), this failure to create a culture unique to the organisation that emerges in a collaborative research setting reflects a lack of systems thinking. Instead of recognising the deeper patterns underpinning events and details as interrelationships, the CRCST adopted a linear, cause and effect response to the events that took place. The shared vision, or ‘pictures of the future’ did not foster genuine commitment and engagement of all stakeholders, but rather, there was a focus on compliance and the principles and guidelines by which that vision might be achieved.

Accordingly, the limited nature of stakeholder

engagement meant that the capacity of the stakeholders to engage in team learning — that is the ability to enter into a genuine ‘thinking together’ (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) — was limited. This is not to say, however, that organisational learning did not take place, but the way in which this learning occurred is important. Over the course of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, several actions taken by stakeholders indicated they had internalised some of the research findings and began to take action, which demonstrated that they were in fact referencing the research outcomes, even though they were not aware they were dong so. During 2001, the GCTB embarked upon a marketing campaign targeted at families. A decline in


235

visitation by families to the Gold Coast was identified in the Market Analysis research project, yet it was the findings of this study that were so strongly rejected by the GCTB. The Scoping study (Moore, 1999) identified a policy and planning void in relation to the management of the destination, and recognised the potential for the GCCC to synchronise other economic strategies with contributions of the tourism industry. During the second half of 1999 through to October 2001, the GCCC was concurrently engaged in developing a comprehensive economic strategy for the city. In the subsequent economic development strategy, tourism was acknowledged as the principal industry of the Gold Coast — a position it was expected to retain “for many years to come” (Gold Coast City Council, 2001, p. 7). The council identified eight areas in the city as having the opportunity to expand the economic base. The GCCC acknowledged the potential for tourism to underpin and further expand the economic contribution of each of these areas to the Gold Coast’s economy, thereby integrating the role of tourism with other economic stratum (See Appendix F for a summary). Ultimately, the planning and policy void identified in the Scoping studies was addressed by the formation of a Tourism Unit in October 2001 as part of the Economic Development and Major Projects Directorate in GCCC. At the second 2020 Visioning Workshop a GCCC Councillor stated: The role of the tourism unit will not encompass destination marketing which is the current role of the Gold Coast Tourism Bureau. It is expected that the Tourism Unit will work closely with many tourism agencies, including the Gold Coast Tourism Bureau and Tourism Queensland to ensure a coordinated strategic approach to further development of our city.


236

The International Image and Positioning study (Chalip & Fairley, 2000, see Appendix E) identified a need to market the destination differently if the Gold Coast was to appeal to overseas visitors. In relation to the Japanese market, which the Gold Coast has relied heavily upon as a target market, the study showed that ‘sun and surf’ should be de-emphasised in marketing appeals. The report stated that: These activities should probably not be featured in marketing communications about the Gold Coast that are targeted at the Japanese market. When considered in conjunction with the favoured activities [seeing a great deal of the city and the surrounding countryside, seeing Australian plants and animals, trying Australian foods in outdoor settings, visiting parks and gardens when touring, and visiting historic sites and towns], this suggests the possible need to reposition the Gold Coast somewhat in the Japanese market (p. 22).

The GCTB launched a market appeal designed to reinvigorate the ‘crucial’ Japanese tourism market (Gold Coast City Council, 2001b) in late 2001. In the media release of the campaign launch the GCTB was quoted as saying: Extensive research carried out by Tourism Queensland in Japan showed the Gold Coast needed to freshen its image and broaden its appeal so that we are seen as much more than a beach resort and theme park destination…. Japanese tourists are now looking for a wider range of experiences. They're more adventurous and they want activities as opposed to just seeing the sights, taking photos and


237

buying souvenirs.

What is apparent here is that although research was cited as underpinning the marketing campaign, the source of that information was attributed to TQ, and no acknowledgement was accorded to the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This occurred again at the 2020 Visioning Workshop when one industry participant asked the facilitator if there was any “… research on what countries overseas say about us, not what we say in our advertising but how they see us.” The facilitator passed the floor over to a TQ member who replied: Yes certainly, particularly in terms of marketing. We have a very good understanding from a number of sources.

From the ATC

(Australian Tourist Commission), a lot of research they have done in each of source markets that come to the Gold Coast. As well as some of the work that TQ has done out of a couple of the key markets, there's some work done called destination positioning blueprints where we understand very clearly by segment by source market what actually motivates the consumer for this destination.

Again, no mention was made of the research arising through the Gold Coast Visioning Project, even though the TQ representative who answered that query was present a meeting in which the findings of the Imaging and Positioning study were released. Although research findings were often challenging, and in many cases ‘distasteful’ to the recipients, the fact that they resisted internalising this new information did not make it any less factual or ‘real’. Over time, the information was gradually brought into individual knowledge networks and, in line with the


238

suggestions of Weiss (1980), demonstrates how knowledge ‘creeps’ and decisions ‘accrete’ over time. Thus, incremental knowledge acquisition over time reflects a change in an organisations frame of reference, but because the process is gradual, the change is often not attributed back to the original source. However, since the work of Weiss says nothing about the initial rejection of knowledge, but only the gradual accumulation of knowledge, what may be more apparent here is evidence of what is known as a ‘sleeper effect’ (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). The ‘sleeper effect’ describes the ‘hidden’ impact that a communication can have on its audience. The attitude change produced by new information is frequently not noticeable until a period of time has passed, hence the term ‘sleeper effect’. Within this effect, information offered by high credibility sources tend to be more readily received than information given from low credibility sources (Underwood & Pezdeck, 1998).

Most audience members have some preconceived notions

surrounding an anticipated message as they draw on existing knowledge structures, or frames of reference in order to ‘interpret’ or make sense of the incoming information. Accordingly, a person might hold certain beliefs or value systems that are difficult to change. Where a credible source presents information that aligns with the recipient’s strong convictions, it is easy for the recipient to agree with the message content, since the individual is predisposed to do so. If on the other hand, a credible source offers information that is contrary to a recipient’s beliefs or values, acceptance of the new information becomes problematic. Where a message recipient may attribute credibility to the source, but disagree with the message, the recipient enters into an ‘unbalanced state’, which is often difficult to resolve. An individual may rectify this state of imbalance in one of three ways (Hovland et al., 1953).


239

First, the recipient may change their opinion towards the subject matter, although this is a difficult state to achieve. Alternatively, the recipient may change their attitude towards the speaker, having determined that the opinions held by the source differ significantly from their own. This then reduces the credibility of the source in terms of the similarity variable. Third, the recipient may dissociate the message from the source. In doing so, the recipient attempts to resolve the issue by denying the source’s responsibility for the communication, or by reinterpreting the content and conclusion of the message. Further, disassociation may also occur in the form of not recalling who said what. Through disassociation, recipients may free themselves of the obligation of having to change their opinion about either the source or the message, when the two do not fit comfortably within their preconceived framework. Over time, however, source effects tend to dissipate. In other words, while the source of the message may initially be brought in to question, over time, the influence of the source does not endure and the information is eventually incorporated into the recipient’s knowledge structures (Hovland et al., 1953). From a cognitive point of view, recipients find ways in which to incorporate the information into their existing knowledge structures. This is what occurred in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The final report to come from the Gold Coast Visioning Project was to provide a summary of all the research undertaken, detail the shared vision for a preferred future for the Gold Coast, nominate actions required to realise that vision, and suggest who should implement those actions so that the ‘vision’ might become a reality.

As draft

versions of the report were presented to GCCC, the response was that “well, yeah … but we already know this”. As one council member stated: It [Gold Coast Visioning Project] has become so ingrained in the


240

process of council … at the end of the process there’s not a, uhm, well its like, “So what? — we already knew all of this”. What has actually happened over time is that the Visioning has been actually integrated into council planning, particularly in the directorate I’m in, in economic development where the Visioning sort of was based…Over time people have become aware of the Visioning process and some of the findings of studies. Yet it hasn’t been so overtly as if they have might read a report or something like that, but it might have been like when the [CRCST] has spoken at like a … regional development meeting or something like that…. The association is not so obvious…. They don’t associate the Visioning with what’s going on in some of the initiatives…. When you look back at the SWOT analysis from the Scoping study you say, wow, a lot of these initiatives have already happened, … but [these initiatives] aren’t actually associated back to the Visioning process, but there again, the Visioning process actually helped guide that…. Even if you have a look at a lot of the initiatives and priorities of the Economic Development Strategy … the segmentation of the different industries … that have a real tourism relevance, but yet that’s never happened before. There is such a greater awareness [of the role of tourism], but that doesn’t get attributed back to the Visioning Project.

Due to the high level of engagement of the GCCC, and the intensity of interaction between GCCC and the CRCST, information was continually being fed to


241

Council. Although the information was not always received willingly, over time elements of the findings had crept into decision making and policy formulation, without the awareness of where that information was grounded. This point illustrates a dilemma of which social scientists have long been aware of (Chalip, 1985). That is, that by endeavouring to understand a system, we alter it; by attempting to alter the system, we come to understand it more. This mutually influential dynamic should not be considered negatively – it is a feature of social phenomena and has been a focus of attention throughout this investigation. Figure 7.2 acknowledges the social construction of knowledge and the role of affect. It is a useful model for understanding the way that knowledge is (or is not) acquired at organisational or inter-organisational levels. There is one further point that should be made here. Although the CRCST repeatedly stated that their role was to stimulate linkages that [would] promote the uptake of knowledge, over time it became increasingly apparent that the CRCST were strong advocates for policy. In fact, they acknowledged this through statements of their achievements at a CRCST meeting after the 2020 Visioning workshops (22 January, 2002). At that meeting, in which a council representative was briefed on the outcomes of the project and the form that the final report was taking, a CRCST member used a model on a whiteboard to illustrate the achievements of the Gold Coast Visioning Project to that point in time. Pointing to a list of outcomes, the CRCST member stated: When we started out we knew there was a policy and planning void — we’ve done that. That’s the unit in council. There was a need for an integrated transport plan for the Coast – we’ve done that. Council have addressed that. There was a need for tourism to be integrated


242

into the overall economic strategy of the city, that’s been done in the 2010 economic strategy of Council. There was a need for tourism to be approached at a regional level, we’ve got REDAC on board and those things are going to start to happen. So when you look at it we have a done a bloody lot over the last three years. (Pointing to a list of the research projects) We have now got this enormous reservoir of knowledge to underpin the future development of the Gold Coast, and we now have a whole series of benchmarks that we can continue to build on and draw comparisons from. But getting this information out is what we haven’t been good at. That’s what still has to be done.

Ironically, what the CRCST described as an achievement was the formulation of policy at different government levels. In other words, they were claiming as an achievement, the very thing they said they would not do. At the same time, the thing they said they were going to do, which was to disseminate research findings so that they might be applied in organisational settings, was the one thing the claimed they had actually not done well. This outcome should not be taken to imply that the Gold Coast Visioning Project had failed. The CRCST may not have engendered the industry engagement that was required for the Gold Coast Visioning Project to become a truly tri-lateral arrangement of knowledge production, but this does not mean that learning did not occur. However, the degree to which reciprocal learning took place was limited. 10.3 Concluding Analysis This chapter has shown how disparate frames of reference affect the mutually


influential roles of communication efforts and social interaction.

243

This occurs

through the affective responses of individuals that reflect their personal values systems through which they establish their ‘world view’, the lens through which they interpret the world.

In the absence of common understanding, stakeholder

engagement will be compromised, but common understanding should not be taken to mean the establishment of common thoughts. Group members may agree on outcomes but that does not mean that they think about the elements that lead to those outcomes in the same way. Further, it does not mean that the cognitive structures of group members need necessarily bear any relation to each other. What it does mean, is that on one thing, group members start to see things similarly. Members of a group may share an objective and may share a conclusion, but they need not share premises, values or beliefs that underlie the points of agreement. This accounts for why frequently, as group members come together pursuant to a common goal, members realise that although agreement may be obtained, different perspectives are being used to get there. Given that group members may reach agreement and hold in common the fundamental elements of objectives and outcomes but they need not share the underlying elements, then it is important to understand the background processes if groups are to formulate actions and think about the possible consequences of those actions. As shown in Chapter Five, differences in values, attitudes and beliefs increase the potential for information exchange (Argote, 1982; Belbin, 1993a; Wood et al., 2001) — disparate views promote the search for more information (Chalip, 1985). This, in turn, develops in the individual an improved understanding of the differing viewpoints.

However, understanding does not necessarily imply acceptance.

Therefore, stakeholders may come to understand differing beliefs and attitudes as


they are exposed more to the value systems of others.

244

Through this level of

exposure, the agendas of all stakeholders become apparent and, to the extent that stakeholders act within those value systems, uncertainty surrounding the social interactions prominent in collaborative settings is reduced. This then creates an environment of trust among stakeholders as they display openness in sharing these views, along with respect and tolerance for their differences. While views may differ, each stakeholder still possesses the ability to contribute meaningfully to the realisation of a common goal. In the case of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, whether or not the disputes observed led to the sleeper effect that was seen and the subsequent downstream cognitions becoming more socially negotiated and commonly understood is arguable. However, the disputes observed did generate substantial discourse and dialogue relating to the meaning of the research findings. That is in itself important if that which is mentioned in the preceding paragraph is to be realised. Therefore, what the CRCST perceived as a negative, which led them to take control of the process, was in fact, a positive occurrence. The fact that this disputatious process was positive was demonstrated by the emergent sleeper effect and by the ‘creep’ of that knowledge into the very discourse of policymaking on the Gold Coast — a ‘creep’ that was so profound that by the time there was an official release of the research findings, stakeholders were intimately familiar with the information being disseminated. Yet ironically, the actual source of that information was the very thing that stakeholders disputed at the outset. Thus, the results have shown that the capacity for organisations to learn, and to learn from each other, is mutually influenced by social contingencies, communication factors and individual cognitive processes (including affective


245

responses), as depicted in Figure 7.2. However, these three factors need not be in perfect harmony before knowledge can be acquired.

The results showed that

knowledge may creep into knowledge networks and then serve to inform decision making and policy formulation. However, this knowledge creep is a precursor to incremental policy formulation. The danger of this outcome is that, as policies change incrementally, there is not the awareness of the process by which the knowledge was acquired and consequently, policy advancements and initiatives may not be attributed to the very project that spawned their development. The observations presented throughout this chapter demonstrate that the disputatious process facilitates not only the movement of knowledge into the system, but movement of knowledge into the system where individuals must grapple with it on a social basis in order to make the cognitive adjustments necessary to draw this information in as knowledge. This being so, it is important to understand what is occurring throughout this process at the group level. To do so will enable a more detailed analysis of the ways in which group interactions are occurring in order to generate the learning observed at the organisational level.


246

CHAPTER ELEVEN Group Learning Analysis

The results in the previous chapter showed that the capacity for organisations to learn, and to learn from each other, is mutually influenced by social contingencies, communication factors and individual cognitive processes (including affective responses). It also showed that individual value systems determine the frame of reference through which individuals interpret events occurring around them, thereby emphasising the role of socio-political factors in the construction of knowledge. The focus of this chapter is on how these factors influence the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge at a group level. Throughout the chapter, analysis draws on data collected through stakeholder meetings, reference group meetings and the 2020 Visioning Workshops. In addition to the model depicted in Figure 7.2, the analysis draws on the model of group knowledge acquisition presented in Chapter Seven (Figure 7.4) in order to identify the junctures at which social contingencies, cognition and communication factors can impair or enhance the ways in which groups acquire knowledge. In order for the analysis to proceed, there are several forms of group interactions that require investigation. Furthermore, it is important to distinguish the context in which group learning took place and the forms of communication that occurred within that context. Within the Gold Coast Visioning Project, the group contexts in which learning was designed to take place were stakeholder meetings, reference group meetings and the 2020 Visioning Workshops. While stakeholder meetings and reference group meetings were occurring in parallel, these took place prior to the 2020 Visioning Workshops.


247

One of the express goals of these meetings was not only to communicate findings, but (at least initially) was also to engender what is referred to in organisational learning terminology as double-loop learning (Argyris & Schön, 1974, 1996). As noted in Chapter Five, double-loop learning at a group level requires the learner to reframe, to develop new conceptions and attitudes, to cognitively re-label existing classifications and amend standards of judgement. One of the requirements for that to occur is that researchers and those managing the project must learn from those who are the intended audience for their research, just as those who are the audience would be learning from those researchers and project managers (Argote et al., 2001; Argote, Ingram, Levine, & Moreland, 2000; Argyris & Schon, 1996; Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). To determine the degree to which single-loop learning (i.e., one-way communication) or double-loop learning was occurring, it is necessary to consider the dynamics at stakeholder and reference group meetings during the Gold Coast Visioning Project. What is of particular interest to this investigation is whether or not meetings were designed and conducted in a manner that would facilitate single- or double-loop learning.

Therefore, it is necessary to examine the processes employed by the

CRCST in order to determine why processes were chosen that were, or were not, likely to generate learning in one direction or another. Thus, in keeping with the chronological order of their occurrence, this chapter commences with an analysis of the stakeholder and reference group meetings, and then moves to an investigation of the 2020 Visioning Workshops. 11.1 Stakeholder Meetings and Reference Groups Interactions between participants at stakeholder meetings presented in the previous chapter highlighted the more contentious exchanges that occurred during


248

the early stages of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Additionally, it was shown that these events were an expression of political activity as individuals engaged in actions that satisfied or protected their personal interests. In order to fully appreciate the degree to which social factors influence the acquisition of knowledge in groups, it is of interest to note the atmosphere at meetings that varied as a function of who was present or not. Awareness of the impact of social influences on group learning is further enhanced by acknowledging the nature of exchanges that took place and the eventual outcomes of those meetings. A constant theme emerged through the analysis of field notes and meeting transcripts, however, it was one that evolved and, accordingly, became more clearly articulated and fully elaborated over time.

Stakeholder meetings were not

characteristic of forums to facilitate group learning. Rather, stakeholder meetings became venues to monitor stakeholder reactions to CRCST processes, to demonstrate the research activates of the CRCST, and to show that these activities were pursuant to establishing a vision of a preferred future for the Gold Coast. Therefore, divergent thought and confrontation were quickly smoothed over and appeared as expressions of the ‘pulling and hauling’ that is politics (Allison, 1971). Consequently, premature closure was frequently brought to bear in group discussion so that consensus might be restored. Restoration of consensus was at the expense of group learning, as illustrated by the following example. A researcher had been presenting to the stakeholders an outline of the proposed social impacts study, designed to monitor the impact of tourism on the host community, as revealed from the perceptions of the local population. Furthermore, the study was to identify residents’ views on the future of tourism, particularly on forms of development that are most compatible with their lifestyle aspirations. After


249

a lengthy discussion about the dimensions the study intended to investigate, an industry representative commented that they were attempting to work closely with the community in an attempt to allay noise complaints from nearby residents. Another industry representative interrupted the discussion with: What happens with this information? In terms of the Daintree community which has been planned and surveyed to death and is now in its tenth lot of re-planning. I believe that because this is a small community, everyone has been sampled numerous times and I believe it is quite negative to the community’s health to have all this sampling going on. I think there is a role where social science is actually contributing to the problem; that it perhaps wasn’t that big to start with. Research in itself creates a big problem.

The comment was not acknowledged by the CRCST representative, but rather, the response was directed to the researcher: The comments that you are getting, are these areas that you are probing into and looking into, or should we be looking to the private sector to have a degree of recording and information available to you to enhance the study?

At this point the researcher replied: Certainly if we could get specific details from specific tourism enterprises that would be great, that would enhance what we are doing. All that we can do really is ask in very much a macro sense about tourism, and we want to qualify that by what people perceive


250

as tourism. The CRCST again directed their response to the researcher and brought closure to the aforementioned industry comment with: The sort of things that this study is raising about the way public react, to document and publish it is an important contribution to the real knowledge base of the tourism industry. Because it is done with some academic rigor to it, it has an authority to it that any single person in private enterprise would never achieve. We need to have a clear view of what we are using it for. Generally, this is for the development of Gold Coast tourism, and knowledge about what the local community expect to feel and understand is immensely important to how you develop it.

It needs to be the best

information…. The CRC is about helping Gold Coast tourism. It is to inform all the different people.

The role of social science and its potential to mutually influence that which is being investigated was deflected; the topic was not returned to. Yet the initiating comment did reflect the belief systems and values of a stakeholder. In fact, it will be shown in the following chapter that the beliefs underlying the stakeholder’s initial comment subsequently impacted upon the level of knowledge that person acquired. It is important to note here that the response of the CRCST meant that an opportunity for double-loop learning was lost. The opportunity for stakeholders to adapt their frames of reference or extend their world view was gone. In the absence of effective communication, there was minimal team learning (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) that took place at stakeholder meetings, and the opportunity for emergent thought


251

(thought that emerges through group discussion that no member previously held) was severely impaired. Instances of confrontational dialogue at a stakeholders meeting (6 April, 1999) and the response of the CRCST to such dialogue were noted in the previous chapter. Communication issues were still apparent in November 1999 and these were brought forward for discussion at a stakeholder meeting. In this instance, the topic of discussion was the means by which research findings were being disseminated to stakeholders. Analysis of meeting transcripts and field notes show that the ‘tone’ or atmosphere at these early meetings could be characterised as ‘tense’. Data analysis revealed that by the meeting on 30 June, 2000, there was a marked change in the atmosphere. At this meeting, as a result of dialogue, each attendee’s comment built upon the preceeding comment offered by another attendee. Therefore, contributions by group members extended upon the comments of one another. The contributions were most frequently varying forms of evidence that served to affirm the viewpoints being offered or the information under consideration. During the meeting, a CRCST representative asked: Is there anything further that we need to look at? I think that in every issue we had so much unanimity and support and thought, its really terrific, and clearly we will be providing the research support to you as we can on each issue.

By drawing on the model presented in Chapter Seven (see Figure 7.4), it can be seen that as information was presented, group members engaged in the search for relevant associations. What was offered for discussion was not necessarily evidence of shared thought, but thoughts that reflected a shared value or belief system.


252

Accordingly, the emotional ambience was positive, and there was noticeably more humour and laughter in later meetings than at those prior to mid-2000. At this time, the industry stakeholder (who, as mentioned earlier, was supportive of the Gold Coast Visioning Project) had been appointed Chair of the GCTB board and other representatives from GCTB became noticeably absent. A comment to the author by a CRCST member at the end of one such meeting was: That was a great meeting wasn’t it? Amazing the difference it makes when a certain person isn’t around!

At a steering committee meeting called to discuss the format of the workshops, one CRCST member asked of another what outcome it was that they wanted to achieve.

The reply was, “The outcome is that I want some sort of

endorsement of my objectives”. While it was noted that those outcomes might be at variance with the Gold Coast City Council’s, the CRCST member continued: I am always realistic in my aspirations and feel that if we get some way towards something like that set of objectives, then we would have made progress. Obviously it has got to be something that is not imposed, it has to be something that emerges out of the engagement. You have to be careful not to push or drive the agenda, too much. I will be restraining myself in that situation. I have a view of what I see those objectives being, and the facilitator will be briefed to prompt. That bit is a bit manipulative, I suppose, but I think it is justified in terms of driving the group towards some position.

What is significant here is that the CRCST member acknowledged the degree


253

of ownership they felt toward the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Due to this sense of ownership, the CRCST demonstrated their desire to maintain control so that the outcomes they perceived as optimal might eventuate. Hence, although the CRCST paid consistent lip service to the need for consultation, their implementation of consultancy was inconsistent with the significance they attributed to the process. Accordingly, the processes of control they applied meant that the CRCST became more than providers of information. Throughout the data, there were twenty-four occasions when the CRCST clearly stated that their role was to stimulate linkages that would promote the uptake of knowledge, not to be policymakers. Yet, as shown in the previous chapter, the processes the CRCST engaged in moved them towards being advocates for policy. As they became more engaged in that role, they departed further from the principles of cooperative research. Therefore, as the CRCST took greater ownership of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, less emphasis was placed (in practice at least) on fostering genuine engagement of a broad range of stakeholders. Rather, the efforts to engage stakeholders focused on those who the CRCST thought would best take the project forward. In practice, stakeholder ‘engagement’ came to mean stakeholder acceptance of CRCST objectives. Nevertheless, it could be argued that this was necessary in order for the CRCST to pursue what they set out to achieve. The CRCST were involved in a research process that sought policy relevance. Therefore, it was impossible for the CRCST to remain outside of policy, particularly if communication efforts were to demonstrate relevance of research findings to stakeholders.

Throughout the research process values will emerge;

research cannot be value free (Chalip, 1985). Accordingly, the emergence of policy and values resulted in frequent friction among stakeholders. The CRCST were then


254

faced with the constant dilemma, if not fear, of the project collapsing under its own political weight. In response, the CRCST sought to manage the process so that the politics did not become unwieldily — a decision that was pragmatic, if not necessary, given the aforementioned circumstances. Accordingly, the control mechanisms and value the CRCST placed on consensus meant that less emphasis was accorded to ‘team learning’ processes (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) as stakeholders were directed towards a preconceived end-state. In so doing, the information presented to stakeholders served to legitimate policies that had been implemented, but simultaneously negated the likelihood of double-loop learning.

Even though the CRCST made every effort to maintain

control through single-loop learning structures, they remained bound by, and at times frustrated by their espoused need to consult with stakeholders.

The frustration

experienced by the CRCST is evidenced in the following paragraph, but what is more important is that because the CRCST espoused the need for consultation, stakeholders expected that they would be part of this process. Subsequently, the CRCST invested great amounts of energy in trying to maintain control — efforts that frequently resulted in exasperation. This was demonstrated on one occasion when prior to a reference group meeting one CRCST member informed the author of a morning’s activities that involved ‘putting out more fires’. The comment was made that “ … we could write a book on the non-technical aspects of this project. The whole exercise has been like herding cats!” A researcher then asked the CRCST member how the presentation of the survey instrument at the forthcoming reference group meeting should be approached.

It was asked whether each item on the questionnaire should be

discussed or whether the reference group should just be “walked through the survey


255

telling them what we are doing”. The reply from the CRCST member was: Just tell ‘em what you are doing – yeah, walk them through, if you consult with them on every item we’ll be there all day. Just walk them through and if they have any real issues they will tell us. Let’s just leave it at that.

This again demonstrates how, in order to maintain control, the CRCST favoured a structure of group meetings that provided single-loop learning. Thus, the one-way communication seen in single-loop learning enabled the CRCST to retain control as they disseminated information to the groups. However, since there was the expectation of stakeholders to be involved in a consultative process, stakeholders expressed a desire to contribute to the dialogue. In turn, this would generate some occasions when there would be double-loop learning, although in many cases that was negligible. In spite of the expressed reluctance to encourage divergent thought in relation to the aforementioned reference group meeting, attendees at the reference group meeting did generate substantial discussion.

Much of the discussion involved

participants gaining clarification as to what the items on the survey instrument were actually asking. Learning occurred as participants developed an understanding of what the survey instrument was trying to achieve. As participants tried to develop an understanding of the survey instrument, the researcher gained insight into the ways in which others might interpret the wording of questions.

As the researcher

reconstructed questions or statements in response to the group, the group then gained a better understanding of the survey instrument. Thus, in spite of the structure of the meeting, double-loop learning did take place. However, it seems that the amount of


256

double-loop learning that took place as thoughts were shared was limited to the extension of existing knowledge structures through assimilation and accommodation, rather than them being restructured. This was because the one-way communication structures favoured by the CRCST served to restrict the degree to which double-loop learning occurred. In fact, it will be shown that these structures became problematic. The result was an imbalance in the strength of communication channels between researchers/CRCST and stakeholders, with the dominant channel of communication coming from the CRCST to stakeholders predominantly representative of government. Another factor that would determine the degree to which there were single- or double-loop exchanges was partly a function of the nature of the emotions experienced and expressed by participants. The influence of emotion could result in one of two effects, depending on the nature of emotional contagion. In Chapter Five emotional contagion was described as “a process in which a person or group influences the emotions or behavior of another person or group through the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states or behavioural attitudes” (Schoenewolf, 1990, p. 50). One effect of emotional contagion is that it can create a ‘group think’ situation whereby the influence of the prevailing mood of the group on decision making processes intensifies as emotions are expressed. Alternatively, emotional contagion may generate a division among participants as an ‘us’ and ‘them’ situation develops. Throughout the project both these effects were evident in stakeholder meetings where the atmosphere changed as a function of group composition. Such an outcome emphasised the influential role of socio-political factors on knowledge acquisition.

Additionally, analysis of field notes showed how the frustrations


257

experienced by the CRCST influenced the manner in which they approached meetings on occasions, thus demonstrating how an individual may bring affect to a group from a previous, unrelated experience (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). The effect of emotional contagion on group performance is discussed in the following section by investigating the degree to which group learning occurred at the 2020Visioning Workshops. 11.2 2020 Visioning Workshops From the very early stages, and throughout the life of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, it was clearly stated that the research projects would underpin the future Vision for the Gold Coast and would serve to inform decisions relating to how this vision would be achieved. Once the 12 research projects were completed, the project was to culminate in two full day workshops at which stakeholders, representative of the Gold Coast business and residential communities, would interact with the appropriate government bodies to produce this future vision for the Gold Coast. Additionally, participants would identify possible opportunities and obstacles to realise the vision and develop a plan of action that would nominate those parties who would take this forward. During an informal interview two months prior to the workshops, the CRCST were asked how participants for the workshops were being chosen. The reply was: Basically we have only budgeted for around 40 to 50 to attend. We’re inviting each council member and every member of the board of the Tourist Bureau – there’s 26 already. We are also trying to get a cross section of representatives of the community, including you know, your environmental groups and industry.

I guess we’ve

weighted fairly heavily towards tourism industry groups – obviously.


258

At stakeholder meetings and reference group meetings the CRCST asked those present for suggestions of likely participants at the workshops.

These

suggestions were noted, but prior to the workshop being held, the CRCST stated that those present at the workshops were “largely an unrepresentative bunch of stakeholders around the tables … they were randomly selected, well not randomly selected, they were selected.”

(See Appendix C for a list of participants and the

sector [industry, government or research] to which they were affiliated.) Interviews and discussions with those present at the workshop showed that many participants had minimal or no exposure to the Gold Coast Visioning Project prior to their attending. 11.2.1 Workshop One – Futures Workshop Through the aforementioned series of events relating to negative media exposure experienced in the early stages of the project, the dissemination of research produced through the Gold Coast Visioning Project was withheld from all parties, except those who were involved in the steering committee or were regarded as key stakeholders.

Additionally, the preferred method of dissemination resembled

teacher-to-student communication, as lengthy reports were presented by researchers or the CRCST. Again, this method of dissemination reflected single-loop learning methods. At workshop planning meetings it was decided that in order for participants to engage meaningfully in the workshops, they would need to be sufficiently informed of the research findings that were intended to underpin the 2020 Vision for tourism on the Gold Coast. Accordingly, the CRCST forwarded a ring binder to all participants prior to their attendance. Reports summarising the research projects


259

completed up to that point in time were inserted in plastic sleeves within the binder. Additionally, details of the Gold Coast City Council Regional Economic Strategy (Gold Coast City Council, 2001a), demographic information relating to the destination and the Queensland Government Strategy for Growing Tourism (Queensland Government, 2001) were supplied. Participants were advised to bring these folders with them to each of the workshops. At the first workshop, the only reference made to these folders was that names should be placed on them, as they all looked alike. Since they were not used at the first workshop most participants did not bring them along to the following workshop. The two workshops were facilitated by different people and so the dynamics at each were markedly different. As both workshops sought different outcomes, the second of which was to build on outcomes from the preceding workshop, the analysis will proceed chronologically. As detailed in a technical paper produced by the CRCST (Faulkner, 2002), the aim of the first workshop, referred to as the ‘Futures Workshop’, was to produce consensus on long-term scenarios regarding the social, economic, political technological and environmental trends at a macro level, and the general tourism implications those trends would have.

So that participants would have a more

informed foundation for discussion, and for subsequent generation of global and domestic tourism scenarios, the workshop commenced with three presentations detailing the needs, aims, and approach to the Visioning project, global economic trends, and an explanation of a futuristic approach to strategic management. After the presentations, participants broke into 12 groups.

They were

presented with a series of questions which, after group discussion, they were required to register their response/s using the Grouputer® technique (See Appendix G for a


detailed list of items requiring participant responses).

260

In the first session,

participants were asked a series of questions to ascertain what they perceived the current state of tourism on the Gold Coast to be, what prospects the future held for Gold Coast tourism, and (if business continued as usual) what they thought the situation would be in the year 2011. Additionally, they were asked what they thought the destiny of Gold Coast tourism was, in terms of what the industry’s current strengths. After a break participants returned to the room, but were asked to alter their seating arrangements so that they were working with a different group than at the first session. The facilitator stressed that this segment of the workshop was to be an expression of creativity; one in which participants could be “as outrageous as [they liked] — the more outrageous the better.” In this session, participants were asked to describe the essence of Gold Coast tourism in the year 2020, and then to describe the scene in detail noting the significant changes that had occurred since 2001. Here participants were encouraged by the facilitator to create “something poetic, and visionary, and sexy”. They were then asked to identify a facility or opportunity that had been added to the Gold Coast to make this difference. Again, participants were asked to be creative in their responses.

They could invent mythical people,

companies or organisations that didn’t exist in 2001 if they so desired.

The

facilitator stressed to participants that this was an exercise that drew on the head and the heart; they were being asked to demonstrate “passion” in their responses. The facilitator was encouraging participants to acknowledge the emotions that were associated with their thoughts. During a presentation earlier in the day, the facilitator stated that people only become tourists for one or more of three reasons. These reasons were to appreciate and celebrate nature, to appreciate and celebrate culture


261

and, to find and create their own well-being. This belief was emphasised strongly, and for the final segment of the second session, participants were asked to describe how Gold Coast tourism enabled tourists to satisfy these needs. Chapter Five described the role of positive emotion in group settings stating that positive-mood individuals exchange more information and are more apt to recognise integrative solutions than those in negative moods (Thompson, Nadler, et al., 1999). Additionally, it was shown that positive affect has been linked to creative thinking (Forgas & George, in press), flexible thinking (Cropley, 1997), and more motivated thinking (Sternberg, 1988). As mentioned earlier, most of the literature surrounding group learning and the influences that come to bear on this have been through research performed in experimental settings. Thus, there is a void in the literature concerning the role and control of positive affect on group performance in real life situations. After the first session, participants moved to a different location for lunch. After a morning of intense thought and concentration, the lunch break was viewed as a ‘welcome relief’ and the participants responded accordingly. Over the course of lunch, participants relaxed, talked and laughed among themselves. The participants brought this mood back to the work environment for the second session. As participants came into the second session, there was an obvious change in the tone or atmosphere in the room from that of the first session. Participants were noticeably noisier, engaging in more dialogue and there was an increase in laughter. When the Chairperson was able to settle the participants, the facilitator was introduced for the second session. As the afternoon progressed, participants lost focus and as they were encouraged to “be as crazy as they liked”, they did so. Since participants were able to see each other’s responses, an almost competitive environment evolved, where groups were building on the humour of each other’s


262

contributions. As one participant stated in an interview after the workshops, “ … it was hard to take the first workshop seriously”. This comment was echoed by others in follow-up interviews. Analysis of the transcripts identified two primary factors underlying this result. First, participants had little respect for the facilitator. This occurred as a result of the facilitator’s method of communication. There were several occasions where the facilitator engaged in self-promotion, which was achieved was through the diminished esteem of participants. For example, the facilitator was trying to create in participants an awareness of future Gold Coast development options. In discussing these options it was said: … and the route you take to thrival, now that's a word I haven’t used, I haven’t used that word yet, thrival. I had to invent the word thrival because I didn’t like survival as an aspirational goal. And the fact that I had to invent the word as an aspirational goal, what does that say about that say about the lack of loftiness in the aspirations of people, if I had to invent the word? Quiet interjections among participants were: “The word wanker fits.” “Thrival?!! It just keeps getting better doesn’t it?”

A little later, when participants were being asked to describe Gold Coast tourism in the year 2020 noting the significant changes that had occurred since 2001 the facilitator passed the comment: Now I created a word thrival and thrivability remember. You can create a whole word yourself that's never been, you have permission


263

to create a totally new word. If you want to. It would be nice if you could explain what it means, but the whole point is you have my permission to create a totally new word that's never been seen on the planet before. Ok. If you want to. Because that's how you create futures. As this last sentence was said, all groups were laughing and sniggering among themselves, some incredulous at the notion. Comments of group members included: “Oh, you can’t help yourself, you just have to respond to this one”. “An English lecturer he isn’t!!” “He comes up with some classics doesn’t he?” “Actually, if we want to be real wankers, we can put his own words back in”.

As participants lost respect for the facilitator, they lost respect for the task that was at hand and the emotions used to cope with the situation, namely humour, spread and intensified as the session progressed. Accordingly, the meaningfulness of the responses degenerated as the day wore on. Therefore, this outcome suggests that while negative affect has been shown to have a detrimental effect on the quality of group outcomes (Barsade, 2001), so too may positive affect if it exceeds a point where the maintenance of the mood overwhelms the task at hand. That is, there exists a curvilinear relationship between positive affect and group performance. With increasing levels of positive affect, group performance may improve to some intermediate point; as the level of positive affect increases past this point, it is then associated with a decrease in group performance. Chapter Five described the notion of group polarisation — the tendency of groups to develop positions and attitudes


264

that are more extreme than those held by individual group members before participating in group discussion (Lamm, 1988; Lamm & Myers, 1978). Therefore, while thought processes can polarise groups, so too can emotions. The results demonstrated more than just emotional contagion at the workshops; it also showed how a prevailing mood may intensify as group members express their emotions. Some members demonstrated with increasing frequency and intensity the dominant positive mood of the group. Another factor underlying the outcome of the workshop was that the facilitator was not able to reach an understanding of some of the issues unique to tourism and brought premature closure to group discussion. In one instance, three group members had expressed in varying ways the fragmented nature of tourism. A CRCST member summarised the discussion by saying: I think what we’re saying here is that collectively we have the capacity but those individual groups that make up that collective have different capacities, and what we have to do is bring together those different groups of stakeholders and change mindsets between them, because some of them are fixed in mindsets that inhibit everyone pulling together towards a rosier future. So it’s a question of harnessing all of these disparate groups and pulling them in a common direction so that we can develop a strategy that will lead us towards a rosier future. The facilitator responded by trying to illustrate the importance of gaining market share through use of a collective approach by citing the example of the Australian wine industry. A participant argued the use of the example by saying: I think it’s the different facets as opposed to, I mean, the wine


265

industry, again I think they are quite clear to what their product is. Tourism is made up of so many different parts it isn’t just one, there's entertainment, there's food there's – it’s not simple … The facilitator then brought an abrupt closure to the discussion with: I'm not suggesting that, uhm, lets move on.

This is a great

discussion but the next question is the most important one in this session. Again, abrubt closure to the discussion demonstrates a lost opportunity for learning. Towards the end of the first workshop, the CRCST expressed to the facilitator their concern over the abstract nature of the responses that were being generated by participants as demonstrated by the following: CRCST: We have got to pick up the pieces of this and synthesise this in some way. Facilitator This is good, they’re being quite creative here and they're having fun. CRCST I would still like to get to some convergence on this. Facilitator Now what we’re going to do, this is where we really pick the ideas up. I mean we got convergence on some core key words, the key words and that's, now they are having a go at creating some scenarios around those key words.

See people are converging

themselves through picking up each other’s words, blissful is one.


266

Blissful is just about common place. CRCST Blissful is more a broader term, it doesn’t mean that much in itself. Facilitator (assertively) I don’t think so. But I mean the question that is there, bliss is right now creating, … see what actually happens is,

what happens

without even trying, is you starting to get a collective convergence because people start to pick up key words and say I like them, and then they say that (pointing to the responses), and you don’t force it. If you force it you kill the energy.

No convergence was achieved at the first workshop. The result was that participants had generated a series of broad statements relating to the future of Gold Coast tourism and the Gold Coast as a destination. In a follow-up meeting, the CRCST noted the responses were ‘grand abstractions’. However, an objective of the second workshop would be to clearly articulate what those statements meant so that actions to carry them forward could be identified, along with those who would take the vision forward. The statements arising from the first workshop were distilled into four categories – environment, lifestyle, culture and the business of tourism. The business of tourism referred to the systems and process that would need to be in place in order for a vision to be taken forward. The CRCST selected a series of the most meaningful statements for each of those categories.

This was with a view to

participants in the second workshop voting on which statement in each of those dimensions best described the preferred future for the Gold Coast.


267

11.2.2 Workshop Two – Visioning Workshop As with the first workshop, the first session in workshop two was a series of presentations to give participants an understanding of issues that would then serve to inform their decision making throughout the day.

The fist two presentations

described the recent policies reflecting the inclusion of tourism in State and local government economic strategy. The session concluded with a presentation defining the notion of sustainability in economic, social and environmental terms. Participants were then presented with the four dimensions by which to describe the preferred future of the Gold Coast, and a list of statements generated at the previous workshop articulating this future. Participants then voted on each statement so that an agreed upon series of statements to define the preferred future for the Gold Coast emerged. These statements were written up and displayed on walls around the room so that participants might keep them in mind as they worked to develop a preferred future for the Gold Coast Hinterland and Gold Coast Coastal strip. Before engaging in that task, participants were given a brief presentation to inform them of the results of the Industry Barometer and Social Impacts studies. The results were presented in terms of percentages of respondents who agreed or disagreed with certain statements presented in the survey instruments. This was the first occasion where research projects, designed to underpin the Vision were mentioned. Participants then broke into two groups; one to develop a preferred future for the Hinterland, the other for the Coastal Strip. Again, the transcripts provided no evidence of team learning (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) or emergent thought – individual knowledge, and therefore group knowledge

structures,

were

being

accommodation, but not restructured.

extended

through

assimilation

and

Documentation of one occasion where


268

divergent thought surfaced is somewhat detailed, but is worthy of acknowledgement since it is of significance to this investigation. The expression of thought resulted in an ‘animated’ exchange of viewpoints between a CRCST member and an industry representative. Another industry member again brought the discussion to a close, but in spite of this, the issue continued to surface throughout the workshop, and at point of writing remained unresolved. The point of contention revolved around the findings of the Tourist Facilities and Infrastructure Audit (Warnken, 2000). Two objectives of this study were to identify and map existing accommodation businesses and tourist facilities and classify each by type, age, visitor capacity and refurbishment initiatives. One of the benefits of this study was that tourism planners would be able to visualise the distribution and characteristics of tourism infrastructure with a view to identifying gaps and deficiencies relative to emerging market trends. The study found that there exists a number of potential infrastructure ‘black spots’ on the Gold Coast arising from concentrations of high-rise accommodation of a similar age. The study reported that refurbishment or replacement of buildings in these areas would be inhibited due to mixed ownership (through strata title) and unrealistic expectations of investors regarding capital appreciation. The point of contention arose in that the industry representative considered the study to be “seriously” flawed and expressed this to the CRCST in a letter dated 2 August, 2001. The letter stated: The report is seriously flawed as it is based upon a false premise that apartment buildings will be allowed to deteriorate and in a few years time many of them will need to be demolished and rebuilt. Nothing could be further from the truth! The thinking behind the progressive deterioration theory seems to be


269

because they are in multiple ownership, but the laws are in place to ensure this does not happen. The practical application of those laws is clearly not understood by the author.

The letter stated a further two reasons why high-rise buildings would not deteriorate to the point where demolition would be necessary, but cited the change in council design regulations (limiting the height of buildings) which would not allow a building of the same size to be constructed in its place, as being the reason why existing structures would be maintained against all odds — redevelopment would not be financially viable. The letter expressed the author’s desire to discuss the matter so that the CRCST “ … could decide what course of action [needed] to be taken before [the] report damaged the credibility of the whole project.” To date the letter was never acknowledged by the CRCST. Accordingly, when the CRCST and the industry participant came together to develop a preferred future for the Coastal strip, it was not surprising that the issue resurfaced and is reflected in the following dialogue: CRCST: We have got some real challenges in that how do you actually facilitate renewal of old stock when you have a whole lot of individual owners who can’t afford to reinvest because the returns here are not conducive to reinvestment. So there's a real challenge here in actually trying to overcome that. How do we do this? Industry member: I found [the] study misleading because [name withheld] didn’t understand the way the buildings operate. The sinking fund and


renewing themselves naturally. I think he is completely coming from the wrong place. CRCST: It may be more than just maintenance [name withheld], because an old building will look old, even if its well maintained. And some of them now, you can just pick them — you can say look that was built 30 years ago or something. We’ve seen, or most of the development we’ve seen is on smaller rise buildings. There's only been one high rise that's been demolished … so that at some stage when the area is fully developed, and we want new development somebody is going to have to acquire a whole building and demolish that. Industry member: I don’t think that they will, because you're restricted by planning regulations now. So they will only be able to rebuild a much smaller building. There's not going to be all that much knocking down and rebuilding. I was talking to someone the other day about how much it would cost to actually put a new face on a building… Tourism Queensland: But isn’t there legislation about sinking funds and that they have to be in place Industry member: Oh, yes… indeed. And they have to be audited annually... Industry member 2: Can I just change the subject? If we are going to … I can’t see a lot of movement forward if we’re just going to look at raw development

270


271

issues just with what's here. What we did in the last session and what we did last time was try to prioritise what we saw for the preferred future.

And at some point we have to decide what

development process or outcome or strategies is needed to achieve what we wanted to do.

The group discussion moved away from infrastructure and focused on how the natural assets, namely the beach, could be better utilised. However, within a short space of time, the aforementioned issue was raised again and is documented by the following: CRCST: …we need to link our natural assets in more to our tourism developments.

Use it in more tourism activities than just say

surfing. There may well be more cultural uses of it that at least in parts of it the development of it as far as possible in the future, you can’t do anything about it tonight but in 30 years time as these buildings start to come down then…. Industry member (looking glaringly at CRCST member) These buildings are not going to come down for a hundred years or more. It was a complete farce what [the researcher] was talking about. CRCST: That's not completely true. There are lots of other places that have made the decision to actually do it, and they may do it in the future, but ….


272

At this point, the same industry member that changed the course of discussion in the first instance, did so again. The point of interest emerges through the next exchange between these same two parties that occurred as the industry participant was presenting the outcomes of the discussion of a preferred future for the Coastal strip to all participants. Industry member: I have grave doubts about the survey that was done as part of the CRC project in terms that in twenty years time we’re going to be knocking down all these high rise buildings because they are aging but this isn’t going to happen because you’ve got multiple owners... CRCST: …that's not quite what the research said. What it did say was the age of it and it was a major issue and a major problem. It was indicated in the research that they may all well be there for a hundred years but there was a lot of research about how we might gain better access to the beach and incorporate it in a more interesting way. I don’t see the point in saying that they’re going to be there for a hundred years and we cant do anything about it and I think that the research needs to be fairly represented and to represent the CRC research fairly, what it did say was that this is a major issue and the work didn’t offer any solutions but it brought awareness that it is a major issue and one that needs to be looked at.

The point here is that during group discussion the CRCST member was


273

promoting a solution and the industry member was disputing it on grounds of financial viability and current legislations. As noted in Chapter Five, diffusion is often viewed as a ‘change agent’ strategy and, therefore, becomes a mask for policy advocacy (Tisdell, 1981). Under the guise of spreading knowledge, disseminators may be tempted to initiate changes, which policymakers deem unnecessary. Rather than information about what might work and what could be done, diffusion becomes an effort to tell what should be done (Etzkowitz, 1996). The CRCST member acknowledged that the issue was one of major concern that needed to be looked at, but did not engage in ‘learningful’ conversations (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) that balance inquiry and advocacy; where individual thinking is exposed effectively and made open to the influence of another. In a follow-up interview it became apparent that the research findings and personal views of the CRCST had become enmeshed in the mind of the industry representative and consequently, he had discarded the validity of the study. This outcome demonstrates a less than desirable side-effect that may arise when organisations in the position of the CRCST fail to remain impartial. The partisan nature of CRCST involvement is reflected in the active role they took in the two workshops. In the first workshop seven of the thirty-one participants represented or were affiliated with the CRCST. Of the thirty-five participants in the second workshop, five were associated with the CRCST. In each workshop CRCST participants contributed actively to group discussions and the generation of responses. As noted in the previous chapter, the CRCST had identified stakeholders to take the vision forward prior to the workshop. The facilitator for the second workshop was closely affiliated with the CRCST and accordingly, had been involved in these discussions leading up to the second workshop. When participants were


274

asked to generate a list of those who would carry the vision forward, 59.4% of responses indicated a regulatory body (State or local government body), while 28.7% suggested industry and tourist associations. Of the 59.4% of responses promoting government bodies to move the vision forward, 25% of those were contributions by CRCST representatives. When the facilitator summarised the contributions in order to achieve consensus on the issue he started by saying: What we are trying to do, and I’ve just put it in my own vernacular, top shelf, middle shelf and bottom shelf. And seemingly, the top shelf is as you looked at, uhm, what we put there not surprisingly, came back to Gold Coast council and the Gold Coast [Tourist] Bureau because they have to work hand in hand and doesn’t matter where you come from, that manifests itself or should around those two. Are people comfortable with that? Because that's what I got from what you were putting up there. Now I guess there was a need for coordination … but if you’ve got the Gold Coast Tourism Bureau and council working together then clearly that's how that linking mechanism works. Its got to link back out to what happening at a state department level.

As evidenced earlier, the CRCST directed the group towards consensus on preconceived outcomes, thereby legitimating the objectives they set out to achieve. Again, while this outcome may not have been optimal, it was pragmatic under the circumstances since many participants were largely uninformed of the research designed to underpin the vision.

This was reflected in several comments that

emerged in both workshops that referred to research. Examples of such comments


275

were: “Have we done any research on what countries overseas say about us, not what we say in our advertising but how they see us?” “There’s a lot of research out there, but how do you get to it?” “What sort of research is available?”

Ironically, all participants were given research report summaries in the folders they were supplied prior to their attending the workshops. Through interviews after the workshops it became apparent that participants did not look at the information as “there was just too much there”. A recurring comment during the interviews was that due to time constraints and existing workloads, participants were not inclined to “digest academic reports”. Therefore, lengthy reports, or even report summaries, are not an effective means of disseminating research. Additionally, the one-way nature of written communication means that the information presented as text is subjectively interpreted by the reader (Kristeva, 1999) and receptivity of individuals is limited by the strength of the intent to learn (Halme, 2001). 11.3 Analytic Synthesis In relation to the model depicted in Figure 7.4, the results showed how the ownership taken by the CRCST circumvented team learning (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) processes. Therefore, group learning throughout the Gold Coast Visioning Project at meetings and workshops was limited to the extension of existing knowledge structures, not their restructuring. While the workshops provided an ideal forum in which to occasion emergent thought, there were two primary reasons why this did not occur. First, since participants had not worked together as a group previously, the


276

analysis of transcripts revealed participants were engaged principally in relationship building, or socialisation processes. As noted in Chapter Five, socialisation is the acquisition of shared attitudes, values, and behavioural norms; a mechanism for transmitting culture through which a common orientation develops. Accordingly, as individuals established social validation through the sharing of common information, they failed to generate novel and original thought. When engaged in such processes, groups tend to value concordance. Groups which hold concordance in esteem tend to suppress the input of information or values that are contradictory to dominant preferences (Janis, 1982). The desire to conform prevents people from expressing critical or novel ideas and, in such a group, amiability and morale take precedence over judgement. Thus, a ‘group think’ emerges as individuals work together to pursue a common goal.

Additionally, the analysis revealed not just emotional

contagion, but the notion of emotional group polarisation, suggesting a curvilinear relationship between positive affect and group performance. Second, the ownership and control taken by the CRCST limited the opportunities for team learning to occur. Through the level of ownership the CRCST had taken of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, stakeholder engagement came to mean (in practice) stakeholder acceptance; a process which legitimated the objectives they sought to achieve. It is important, however, to reinforce the fact that although the actions of the CRCST did not produce optimal outcomes in terms of group learning, the management practices they engaged in were practical given the circumstances mentioned previously, if the objectives of the Gold Coast Visioning Project were to be achieved. Drawing on the model presented in Chapter 7 (see Figure 7.2), the results again show how the opportunity to acquire and utilise knowledge results as a


277

function of interrelated influences of individual cognition, social contingencies, affect, and communication.. As with inter-organisational and organisational learning, mismanagement of these factors does not necessarily imply an absence of learning, but it does limit the degree to which learning takes place. Therefore, for team learning and emergent thought to develop in collaborative settings such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project, cognitive, social, affective, and communication issues must be acknowledged. Additionally, these issues need to be managed in an impartial manner appropriate to the circumstances. The following chapter discusses these issues relative to individual learning.


278

CHAPTER TWELVE The Creation, Dissemination and Utilisation of Knowledge in Individuals

The previous two chapters have demonstrated the interrelated role of cognition, communication, social contingencies and affect in the acquisition and utilisation of knowledge in and among organisations and groups. The results have shown how these factors influence the capacity of organisations and groups to acquire knowledge. Additionally, the impact of these factors when collaborative project management processes depart from the principles required for organisations to learn (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) has been described. This chapter investigates the ways in which individuals acquire knowledge and examines the degree to which the processes of knowledge acquisition are influenced by individual cognition, communication methods, social contingencies and affect. The methods of dissemination employed by the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) during the Gold Coast Visioning Project are explored. Drawing on the models presented in Chapter Seven, the ways in which individuals incorporate new information into existing knowledge structures are examined. This chapter completes the multilevel analysis of data and a synthesis of the results is presented the following chapter. The chapter commences with an investigation of the process of knowledge creation in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This is examined in conjunction with the degree to which current Australian science policy facilitates or inhibits the production of scientific knowledge through collaborative research arrangements.

These elements establish the context and

contingencies which affected the acquisition and interpretation of knowledge by individuals.


279

12.1 The Creation of Knowledge The previous chapters have described the degree of ownership and control the CRCST gained over the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The following results are not intended to belabour this point; rather, they demonstrate how scientific knowledge intended for organisational application was created in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The purpose of this is to highlight the impact apparent anomalies within Australian science policy may have on research conducted through Cooperative Research Centres. In so doing, an explanation of the extent to which researchers engaged in such settings develop contextual knowledge is offered and discussed in relation to the subsequent degree to which knowledge arising through these collaborative settings is utilised. As noted earlier, the CRCST struggled to achieve broad industry engagement in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. One reason for this struggle may be that the overall structure of the research program and direction the project would take were preordained; it did not result from broad industry representation. This is further evidenced by a CRCST document detailing the research program for the years 1998 to 2001. The twelve projects are described in terms of objectives, methods and proposed benefits the research findings would deliver. Further, researchers heading each study were named. While the document is not dated, the first two studies undertaken were scheduled to deliver executive summaries on 2 October, 1998, two weeks prior to the announcement of the project. This implies that the research program had, in large part, been developed prior to the time that industry was engaged.

Although the CRCST did state within that document and at several

stakeholder meetings that the research program was subject to change and review as needed, the research program changed little over the course of the project.


280

During interviews with researchers it became apparent that they were invited by a member of the CRCST to participate in the Visioning project on the basis of research interests and skills and/or expertise within a related area. A comment by one researcher suggested that the “CRC was a ‘milking cow’ for researchers to pursue their own interests”. This comment was reinforced by the CRCST which stated that researchers needed to understand the collaborative nature of a Visioning project more and needed to be more attuned to the needs of stakeholders. In the absence of two-way communication, researchers are not able to develop the contextual perspective that would occasion research that is more ‘attuned’ to stakeholders needs.

Consequently, academic researchers’ frames of reference

determined the program. That is, the pursuit of personal research interests may take precedence over producing research that is timely and appropriate to inform the sorts of decisions that stakeholders need to make. A reason that collaborative research may be undertaken to pursue personal interests may lie within the science policies that underlie the CRC process and Australia’s Higher Education system. The reward system for Australian academia is still strongly based on the ‘publish or perish’ ethos.

That is, universities and academics are rewarded financially and

professionally for research publications. While current science policies in Australia espouse support for collaborative research, contradictions exist within policy documents that ultimately serve to maintain the current institutional distinction between ‘applied’ and ‘basic’ research and the attendant linear model of knowledge application.

On the one hand,

government encourages the dissolution of the insulate nature of science, yet on the other hand, government maintains the structure and elitism of universities in policy statements. To illustrate, the recent White Paper on Higher Education (DETYA,


281

1999) in Australia states: The policy framework should encourage and reward the development of an appropriately entrepreneurial culture in which researchers and the various institutions collaborate among themselves, across the world and with other players in the innovation system. Collaboration should encompass the sharing of knowledge, technique, expertise and research infrastructure and take varying forms, including cooperative projects and student and staff exchanges. Universities should have policies and structures in place to facilitate the commercialisation of discoveries, with particular regard to regional spin-offs. Key among these is the development of an entrepreneurial culture among researchers. (p. 7)

While this reinforces the necessity for collaborations between industry and science, seven pages further in the document the Government states the following: There is a need to ensure the continued strength of basic research while encouraging more application-oriented research, in line with the greater emphasis placed on external linkages and collaboration.... The Government believes that basic research serves as the foundation and catalyst to much commercial research and is a fundamental driver of innovation.... The current balance between basic and applied research would be maintained for the time being. (p. 14)

This clearly reflects a maintenance of the linear perspective of research that


282

was described by Vannevar Bush (1945) over half a century ago — that basic research is the precursor to applied research, which leads to innovation.

Such

thinking is reinforced more strongly in science policy documents which state, “Through basic research, institutions provide the foundations, which underpin the nation's social, cultural and technological progress” (DETYA, 1999, p. 29). It is difficult to know how, as an institution, science is expected to maintain “a strong capability in basic research”, “develop an entrepreneurial culture and seek more collaborations with industry, with a view to innovation” and yet “maintain the current balance between basic and applied science for the time being”. As there is little in place to encourage academics to engage in collaborative arrangements for scientific knowledge production, researchers involved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project demonstrated varied, but limited desire to engage in collaborative exchanges with industry. Not only was this apparent in the design and direction of the research projects, but also in the dissemination of those projects’ findings. 12.2 Communication Methods As noted in the previous chapters, because of the socio-political factors that emerged in the early stages of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, dissemination efforts of the CRCST focused on key stakeholders. These were predominantly oneway communication methods in the form of presentations or reports. Acquiring knowledge involves cost — cost in terms of cognitive effort expended and time required to engage in the complex cognitive processes needed to reorganise existing knowledge structures.

In one-way dissemination processes the cost to acquire

knowledge is imposed upon the recipient. Two-way communication increases the costs of stakeholders’ knowledge acquisition to researchers, as more time and effort are required in order to develop mutual understanding between the collaborating


283

parties. Unfortunately, the institution of science has little in place to reward those who would engage in such activities. Consequently, the methods used to disseminate information to stakeholders failed to create feedback loops that would lead to twoway communication. This created situations that would, according to the literature, result at best in accommodation of knowledge, and where the receptivity of individuals would be limited by the extent of the strength to learn (Halme, 2001). However, the results show that although individuals may not demonstrate cognitive restructuring initially, restructuring may take place over time as knowledge ‘creeps’ into individual knowledge structures. As shown in Chapter Ten, incremental changes over a period of time may culminate in the change of an organisation’s frame of reference. For this to occur, individuals must champion or justify why organisational changes need to occur. Using the Gold Coast City Council as an example, prior to the Gold Coast Visioning Project, Council policies did not acknowledge the economic contribution of tourism; nor did policies reflect a management approach to the role of tourism in the development of the destination. However, by mid-2001 it was apparent that there had been a paradigm shift in the approach Council was taking to tourism. This was reflected in the creation of the Tourism Unit and in the degree to which the tourism was incorporated into the economic strategy adopted by Council. Council members who previously had no conceptual understanding of a ‘whole-of-destination’ approach to tourism management, enthusiastically promoted the importance of that approach at the Visioning workshops.

These outcomes show how, over time,

incremental changes in knowledge structures mimic the process of décalage as described in Chapter Four. That is, over time individuals attribute personal relevance and meaning to information, leaving knowledge networks to be restructured.


284

Additionally, this result demonstrates the interrelatedness of the different levels of learning as depicted in Figure 7.1.

Since policy is rarely made by

individuals acting alone, new knowledge is legitimated and socially validated through the sharing of information that occurs as individuals come together as a group to formulate policy. The way in which knowledge ‘creeps’ into individual cognitive structures can be used to explain why policy change is predominantly incremental in nature — the knowledge to inform decision making and subsequent formulation is itself evolving incrementally as individuals attribute personal relevance and meaning to information. While this demonstrates a deeper level of individual learning, the use of alternative dissemination methods would have enhanced this process and produced more optimal outcomes. This was evidenced at a stakeholders meeting called to present the findings of the Tourist Facilities and Infrastructure Audit (Warnken, 2000). The researcher presented findings that suggested there were a number of potential infrastructure ‘black spots’ on the Gold Coast arising from concentrations of high-rise accommodation of a similar age. The researcher went on to emphasise that refurbishment or replacement of buildings in these areas would be inhibited due to mixed ownership (through strata title) and unrealistic expectations of investors regarding capital appreciation. Therefore, the concentrated aging of infrastructure was a source of concern. The response by the GCCC was: These findings are worrying. Does your study say how we should go about addressing this problem? The researcher responded with one word — “no”. In this instance, while the research findings provided information, it was not clear to the Council representative where this information would fit within their


285

existing knowledge structures. In order to give it utility, the stakeholder was looking to others for help in determining how that information might alter the way they currently thought about issues relating to Gold Coast infrastructure. There are two possible explanations for this. First, it could be that the Council representative lacked sufficient procedural knowledge (knowing how to take data, turn it into information and incorporate that into existing knowledge structures) required to identify the ways in which they might think differently about Gold Coast infrastructure issues.

Alternatively, the information presented to the Council

representative was so different to how they currently thought about Gold Coast infrastructure issues that they were unable to know how to integrate it in to their existing knowledge structures. If research findings are to be utilised in problem solving or decision making tasks, it must first be integrated into an individual’s knowledge structure — procedural knowledge presupposes that an individual has been able to identify where that new information fits within existing knowledge structures. This means that individuals must know where knowledge fits within existing knowledge structures before they are able to identify how that new knowledge might change the ways in which they currently think about something. Therefore, knowledge acquisition and utilisation requires both contextual and procedural knowledge. Council planners frequently engage in decision making tasks that employ procedural knowledge skills. Therefore, it is more likely that the example cited is as a result of the latter, rather than the former explanation. However, this cannot be determined conclusively by the data. Whichever the case may be, what is shown by the data is that the Council representative required assistance to know how to fit that knowledge in with their


286

current thinking about Gold Coast infrastructure in order to utilise it optimally. However, the researcher was limited in their ability to assist the Council representative’s uptake of knowledge since the one-way communication processes employed meant the researcher did not have access to the same contextual knowledge held by the Council representative.

A greater understanding of the

contextual knowledge held by the Council representative would have helped the researcher to, in turn, help the stakeholder establish where that information fitted within their existing knowledge structures. Additionally, where a researcher has access to the contextual knowledge held by a stakeholder, they are able to assist in the development of the stakeholder’s procedural knowledge. Researchers involved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project did not have sufficient access to the contextual knowledge held by stakeholders. Consequently, there were several occasions when stakeholders interpreted their difficulty in knowledge acquisition as problems with communication. This is demonstrated in the following dialogue that took place during a steering committee meeting held on 24 November, 2000: Industry Stakeholder We need communication processes that ensure delivery of the answers that are wanted. Council Stakeholder This issue about communication is all-important. Researchers forget what others don’t know. In other words, they fail to communicate in a language that we can all understand. Industry Stakeholder (with increasing annoyance) Information is compiled in a way that is not user friendly.... The CRC needs to focus on industry and the private sector and produce


287

research relevant to these sectors. Again, the data do not demonstrate whether stakeholders’ difficulty in comprehending research findings resulted from insufficient procedural knowledge skills, or whether incoming information was so dissimilar to stakeholders’ existing knowledge structures they were unable to process it at that point in time. What this example does demonstrate is that one-way communication presupposes that each party possess similar procedural and contextual knowledge structures. Therefore, effective dissemination would involve techniques that encourage participants to collectively explore their existing knowledge structures and the ways that these structures do, or do not, relate to new information. These dissemination methods would provide the opportunity for participants to extend their contextual knowledge and procedural knowledge and, in so doing, develop a greater understanding of the contextual and procedural knowledge held by others. The CRCST acknowledged the cultural differences between academia and practitioners when it was stated that they endeavoured to focus research efforts on matters that are important to industry while making the process “understandable without academic mystery” (CRCST, 1999, p. 3).

However, the assumptions

inherent in one-way communication processes failed to achieve this as stakeholders struggled to ascertain the relevance of, and attribute meaning to research findings. In Chapter Two it was suggested that an impediment to successful utilisation of knowledge arising through cooperative research efforts is due to the existence of ‘two cultures’.

These findings suggest that the differences observed between

researchers and practitioners may be cognitive rather than cultural.

One-way

communication processes do not reconcile the differences between procedural and contextual knowledge. The procedural knowledge inherent in the research process


288

demands deeper exploration of existing knowledge structures and how those structures relate to new information in order to expand one’s knowledge base. Conversely, practitioners possess deep contextual knowledge.

They are acutely

aware of their environment, the issues arising from it, and how they are embedded within it. The problem arises when, through a lack of mutual understanding, elements of potential knowledge fail to be accepted by practitioners and researchers are unaware of the degree to which information is, or is not, being absorbed into the recipient’s cognitive structures.

As stated by Schuetz (1964), “It is not my

environment nor your environment nor even the two added; it is an inter-subjective world within reach of our common experience” (p. 31). Rearticulated, ‘environment’ is essentially an individual’s frame of reference.

The establishment of social

relationships is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for knowledge transfer to take place.

Rather, knowledge transfer occurs through the interconnectivity of

individual contexts that emerges through mutual understanding. It is not possible to achieve this through one-way communication processes. 12.3 The Role of Affect in Individual Knowledge Acquisition By applying the model of individual knowledge acquisition presented in Chapter Seven (see Figure 7.3) to data collected, it is possible to identify how affective responses may relate to existing knowledge structures and subsequently influences the degree to which knowledge is acquired. At one meeting, a researcher was presenting to stakeholders the findings of the International Imaging and Positioning study that showed there should be less emphasis placed on the surf and swimming when marketing the Gold Coast to international markets (Chalip & Fairley, 2000). A GCCC member interjected passionately with:


289

I don’t know how you can say that the beach isn’t important to these markets… I mean, you go to the beach any day and its full of Asian tourists….I live five minutes from Burleigh and every morning before work I go for a surf and there are always tourists there.

The point of interest here is that the researcher never mentioned the word ‘beach’ when presenting those findings; the words ‘surf’ and ‘swimming’ were clearly stated. For the stakeholder there was such a strong association between the surf and the beach, that the two could not be differentiated. The affective response that accompanied the comment clearly reflected something that was strongly felt by the stakeholder. The researcher reiterated the finding and clarified the distinction between the surf and the beach, reinforcing this with the finding that activities such as walking along the beach were important to many international markets, but the surf itself was not. Therefore, Gold Coast marketing efforts directed to these markets needed to look beyond the ‘sun, surf and sand’ image. However, the stakeholder did not grasp the distinction, and subsequent comment continued to reflect an affective attachment to the necessary linkage between surf and beach. By drawing on the model depicted in Figure 7.3, it is possible to identify the juncture at which the strength of existing associations inhibited the acquisition of knowledge. As information enters an individual’s knowledge network a search for relevant associations is undertaken. This is the first point of negotiation as a decision must be made as to what existing schematic networks are relevant and in what way. As shown in Figure 7.3, a decision is required to ascertain the degree to which additional schemata need to be mobilised. Are existing associations to assimilate and, in turn, accommodate new information, or is restructuring required in order to


290

incorporate the new information? At this point, the stakeholder correctly identified that the incoming information was different to existing schema, but because of the strong affective response connected to personal values underlying that pattern of association, the information was rejected. This finding demonstrates that associative networks contain connections to affective states that may become activated outside of conscious awareness.

Therefore, meanings may be attributed to information

without the individual being cognizant of how or why these associations have formed. Yet, since they exist, they may be drawn upon in subsequent cognitive tasks. This incident also demonstrates the affective responses generated when individual values or belief systems are challenged by a divergent viewpoint. It highlights the role of affect in knowledge acquisition.

Further to this, it

acknowledges the notion that “objective knowledge must always be created by the listener: the listener understands, and objective knowledge appears transferred, only if he [sic] is prepared to understand” (Maturana, 1980, p. 5). In this instance, the stakeholder was not able to understand the meaning of the research findings. The strength of affect connected to that particular knowledge network (arising from personal values) was so intense, the individual was unable to engage in the effort, both emotional and cognitive, to restructure their network of associations and draw in new knowledge. In contrast to this, the same researcher gave the same presentation to a group from Tourism Queensland (TQ) a week later.

When the same findings were

presented to this group, the response from a TQ member was “I just want to ask a question; beaches was important but swimming wasn’t?” In this instance, the TQ member was seeking clarification of the information as they sought to incorporate it


291

into their knowledge structures and demonstrated the deeper levels of cognitive processes available in the absence of strong affective responses to information. Individual values and belief systems were also shown to impact upon the acquisition of knowledge in other ways. In the last chapter, an instance was cited where a stakeholder, representing industry, questioned the role of social science because of a belief that there was the potential for it to influence that which is being investigated. This belief was never explored and, in a subsequent interview, the stakeholder revealed additional beliefs associated with the social sciences. These beliefs led to the opinion that one research study (the International Imaging and Positioning study) was meaningless. The stakeholder stated: I don’t have a very high regard as how any of our organisations understand those principles [of marketing]…. I think its clearly a whole issue of cross-cultural issues.

Just because people speak

English, doesn’t mean they think it. A lot of the research I see is empirical, judgemental….

We need look at our markets in the

context of what is happening in their markets, but I am not sure how you would do that.

The stakeholder was questioning the validity of research on the basis that the researcher was interpreting the values of one culture through the values of another. Therefore, on the basis of an individual belief system, the stakeholder discounted the research findings. The two comments made by this stakeholder reflect philosophical insights and a belief system related to social science and the methodologies available for social scientific investigation. In the absence of communication that allowed stakeholders and researchers the opportunity to enter into a genuine ‘thinking


292

together’ and engage in conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy, the potential contributions of this stakeholder were never realised; nor was the utility that research might have had for the stakeholder. The way in which affect impedes individual knowledge acquisition demonstrates human resistance to change. Change results in uncertainty which gives rise to the negative affective states of distrust, suspicion, threat and fear (Fenigstein & Vanable, 1992) — states that humans seek earnestly to avoid. The results of this study suggest that individuals may maintain existing knowledge structures in order to avoid experiencing these affective states. When an individual is presented with information that is contrary to their current beliefs or values, acceptance of that new information becomes problematic as they try to determine where that information might fit within existing knowledge structures. If the new information is to be accepted, then some elements within existing knowledge structures must change in some way.

In determining what

knowledge structures must alter in order to integrate new information, the recipient experiences the negative affect associated with change, but may not be cognizant of why they are experiencing it. Accordingly, the individual may enter into a state of cognitive disequilibrium, which is often difficult to resolve.

To resolve this

unbalanced state of congnition, the recipient may choose to reject the information and in so doing, the recipient relieves themselves of the negative affective states experienced when new information conflicts with existing cognitive structures. The results of this study show that knowledge does not just creep into existing cognitive structures, but rather, individuals must reconcile negative affective states felt before this can occur. The human tendency to avoid negative affective states corresponds with the sleeper effect observed during this study.


293

As described in Chapter Ten, the sleeper effect refers to a delayed change in beliefs or attitudes as a result of new information that was initially rejected. When an individual is presented with new information that is contrary to existing beliefs or values, they experience cognitive conflict as values and beliefs they hold in esteem and/or are institutionally dependent on, are challenged (Hovland et al., 1953). To resolve this inner conflict and reduce the intensity of the negative affect experienced, the individual may choose to reject the information. The rejection of the information can be justified by discrediting the source and, therefore, the message. Alternatively, where the source is credible, the recipient may choose to disassociate the message from the source by re-evaluating the role the source has had in the creation of the message. In so doing, the recipient attempts to resolve the internal conflict that arises when existing beliefs about the source and the new information are incompatible. At the time of exposure to the new information, the recipient may deny the source’s responsibility for the communication or may reinterpret the content or conclusion of the message (Hovland et al., 1953). In other words, the individual can conclude that either the message was obtained elsewhere, or that the communicator meant something else when they presented the information.

Additionally,

disassociation may also occur in the form of not remembering who said what. Through disassociation, recipients free themselves from the need to change significantly their opinion about either the source or the message, thereby, releasing themselves from the negative affective states associated with change. Since the new information is no longer associated with cognitive conflict, that new information is able to be incorporated into existing knowledge structures. As an individual reflects on this information, over time they are able to take greater ownership of it as they


gradually adjust their existing knowledge structures.

294

Therefore, it may be the

negative affective states associated with change that occasion the sleeper effect. However, in instances where individuals are institutionally dependent upon existing values and beliefs, the sleeper effect may be underpinned by socio-political factors. One final aspect to consider in this chapter is the social influences on knowledge acquisition and how that impacts on individual knowledge attainment. 12.4 Social Influences in Knowledge Acquisition The last two chapters have demonstrated the ways in which socio-political factors influenced the eventual outcomes of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. As noted in Chapter Ten, the media release of the Market Analysis (Tideswell, 1998) resulted in negative responses from industry leaders. This resulted in a series of events, which reflected attempts by those involved with the Gold Coast Visioning Project to either maintain or establish levels of authority. While initially the CRCST sought media opportunities to justify the need for, and promotion of the project, others used the press to discount the credibility of the research and diminish the significance of research findings. For example, the GCTB was quoted in the press (“Tourism Study”, 1999) as saying the research “was based on figures which bore no relevance to the current situation”. At this point in the project, the GCTB behaved as if they felt institutionally threatened by the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The GCTB were uncertain of what change might occur because of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. That is, the ways the Visioning Project would change how the GCTB thought about, and worked with tourism on the Gold Coast. This uncertainty gave rise to the negative affective states of distrust, suspicion, threat and fear, which were reflected in overt displays of resistance as demonstrated in Chapter Ten.

Accordingly, the GCTB sought to


295

maintain their current power base by discrediting the message and rejecting not only the information, but also the need for the project. Therefore, the research was used as a tool by which to maintain the status quo within the Gold Coast tourism industry. Public displays of resistance to the project by the GCTB socially reinforced the resistant behaviour displayed by other industry stakeholders who were also unsure of the need for the project and of the outcomes it might produce.

This was

demonstrated in Chapter Ten where major industry groups such as the GCTB, the Surfers Paradise Chamber of Commerce and the theme park operators were all critical the Gold Coast Visioning Project. However, as the Gold Coast Visioning Project gained momentum and wider industry acceptance, and there was a shift in the balance of power on the board of the GCTB, it became more advantageous, politically and socially, for this GCTB member to endorse the Visioning Project and appear supportive of its endeavours. The same person from the GCTB was quoted in the press the day after the release of the final Gold Coast Visioning Report as saying, “The report [gives] the city plenty to think about…. It’s sounding that a preferred way forward is to be more detailed in planning and we would have to agree with that.” (Templeton, 2002) Though not in the traditional social-cognitive psychology sense, these observations suggest a sleeper effect in terms of attitude change. The data do not demonstrate this conclusively, but a radical, change in attitude that occurs over time could also be due to the social reinforcement and subsequent political advantage to be gained by doing so. As one CRCST member was recorded as saying at a meeting, “It’s all about power, and he knows how to play the game perfectly. It’s all about support of the board, and that’s what he must have if he is to survive.” The data do not show whether the attitude shift displayed by the GCTB


296

member occurred through the restructuring of knowledge structures (i.e., there was a change in values or belief systems), or whether the attitude change occurred through political necessity. Over time, it became apparent that institutional survival for this person would be enhanced by public endorsement and support of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. However, the data did show that this GCTB member did acquire some new knowledge through research arising from the Gold Coast Visioning Project, although that knowledge was not attributed to the Gold Coast Visioning Project. As shown in Chapter Ten, the GCTB member cited research underpinning a new marketing campaign (Gold Coast City Council, 2001b), but the source of that information was attributed to TQ, and no acknowledgement was accorded to the Gold Coast Visioning Project.

This incident demonstrates the sleeper effect in

traditional social-cognition terms. Additionally, the CRCST gained ownership and control of the Gold Coast Visioning Project through social influence.

The results have shown how the

authority structures that emerged through the Gold Coast Visioning Project influenced the type of knowledge created and the manner in which that knowledge was, or was not disseminated. Accordingly, the results demonstrate how the social influence that emerges through organisational structure (control opportunities) can be used to achieve certain ends. Thus, social contingencies influence the creation, acquisition and utilisation of knowledge in individuals. 12.5 Analytic Synthesis The findings presented in this chapter have demonstrated the ways in which social contingencies, individual cognition, communication methods and affect impinge upon the acquisition of knowledge in individuals.

Individuals seek to

maintain self-interests, whether through the preservation of personal values and


297

belief systems, and/or through the maintenance or establishment of authority. In doing so, individuals selectively acquire knowledge, yet over time, the restructuring of knowledge networks may occur incrementally. This demonstrates how existing knowledge may be underdetermined by existing knowledge. Existing knowledge structures contain affective associations, and to alter them brings about that which humans resist the most – change. Change brings about uncertainty; uncertainty results in negative affective states that humans seek to avoid. Accordingly, the successful unification of industry, government, and institutional research in trilateral arrangements of knowledge production present an immense challenge. Each group holds its particular ethos in high esteem, and in some instances individuals can be quite resistant to even small compromises. Finally, it was shown how current Australian science policy and the structure of the Higher Education system is the antithesis to that which it is espousing to achieve, namely the development of trilateral arrangements of scientific knowledge production. This was offered as an explanation of why researchers within the Gold Coast Visioning Project did not fully engage in the collaborative process. While this also may have influenced the dissemination efforts, the results showed that limited opportunities for individual knowledge acquisition do not prevent it from occurring. Incremental change in knowledge structures over time (i.e., the sleeper effect) lessens the affective impact individuals may experience and provides additional insight as to why changes in policy are predominantly incremental. This section of the thesis concludes with the following chapter, which provides a synthesis of the results. The final chapter discusses the theoretical and practical implications the findings of this study have in relation to collaborative networks that are formed to produce scientific knowledge intended for organisational


application.

298


299

CHAPTER THIRTEEN Synthesis of Results

The previous three chapters have presented a multilevel analysis of the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The results have shown that at all levels of learning, the degree to which knowledge is acquired is as a function of the interrelated influences of social, cognitive and communication factors. Furthermore, these factors are underpinned by affective states that reflect values through which an individual interprets the world. The aim of this chapter is to describe coherently the nature of the emergent phenomena arising through this investigation with reference to the models presented in Chapter Seven.

Therefore, it is necessary to continue this examination at

organisational, inter-organisational, group and individual levels.

Not only is it

important to understand the elements occurring within each of these levels, but also it is important to understand how these elements interact across levels. In so doing, it is possible to identify points of transmission among the levels, which occasions the opportunity to both theorise this process and, in turn, take greater control of it. Before moving to this point, it is necessary to set the context within which these processes occurred. Accordingly, this chapter commences with a discussion on the nature and scope of collaboration achieved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project, and the subsequent impact this had on the interrelated cognitive, social, affective and communication influences. The interrelated nature of these influences was portrayed in Figure 7.2. 13.1 Nature and Scope of Collaboration Perhaps the most fundamental finding was that a truly tri-lateral arrangement


300

of collaboration did not develop through the Gold Coast Visioning Project. A tri lateral arrangement would see industry, government and research sectors as overlapping helices, the intersection of which results in the emergence of an organisation in its own right (see Figure 2.4). If organisations can be conceptually represented as helices (as in the Triple Helix model), then organisational life can be thought of as spheres of activity. The distinct organisations that emerge through these overlapping spheres of activity develop as procedural routines from each sector are shared and, in turn, centre on the emergent organisation’s own institutional order. Further to this, it is an institutional order that is accepted and adopted by all actors in that organisational field. The formation of these new organisational fields, however, requires more than intellectual acceptance of their utility. It requires a fundamental cultural shift from one sphere of activity to another where existing roles are altered and sometimes diminished on comparison to an individual’s standing in their original organisation. Within this new organisation, all actors are of equal importance, and their contributions would be afforded equal status. These ideals were not realised in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Not only did the sectors remain separate, but the CRCST became a new element in the system, and each sector’s connection to the others was mediated through communication controlled by the CRCST. Additionally, the strength of communication between sectors was not equivalent.

This is depicted in Figure 13.1.

The lines of

communication between government and the CRCST were the strongest, and from industry to researchers the weakest, as indicated by the line weight in Figure 13.1. The communication between industry groups and the CRCST was not as strong as those between the other sectors; consequently, it is represented as a broken line. The way in which communication efforts were directed and delivered gave rise to


301

Government Industry

CRCST

Research

Figure 13.1.

Diagrammatic representation of the scope and intensity of

collaboration in the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The intensity of collaboration is indicated by the weight of the directional arrows.

significant, yet largely unanticipated, socio-political issues. 13.2 Emergent Phenomena at an Organisational and Inter-organisational Level Since the Gold Coast Visioning Project did not constitute a separate and distinct organisation, participants brought to the setting procedural routines, rules and status accorded them in their originating organisation. Accordingly, this gave rise to control opportunities and control problems, as described in Chapter Six.

This

situation evolved because, from the outset, the CRCST did not have full stakeholder


302

engagement. The CRCST sought broader stakeholder acceptance after the fact. Since stakeholders did not help to plan the management of the project, and were only minimally involved in research planning, many did not take ownership of the project or its outcomes. Stakeholders struggled to ascertain the need for the Gold Coast Visioning Project and, in turn, attributed only minimal meaning and personal relevance to the research findings. As the CRCST’s ownership of the project became more entrenched and stakeholders found themselves only peripherally involved in the process, any potential for the Gold Coast Visioning Project to establish itself as a learning organisation evaporated. Rather than recognising the deeper patterns underpinning events and details (i.e., systems thinking), the CRCST saw events as linear causeeffect chains. Participants in the Gold Coast Visioning Project were not afforded the opportunity to develop personal mastery through continual clarification and deepening of their own vision, since they were not encouraged to unearth their internal views and bring them to the surface for scrutiny. The ownership and control that the CRCST gained over the project meant that the management processes they adopted did not occasion ‘learningful’ conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy — where individuals expose their own thinking effectively and make that thinking open to the influence of others. Consequently, stakeholder commitment and engagement were negligible. The CRCST management of the project had a profound effect on its eventual outcomes. 13.2.1 Socio-political Factors The management of the project was flawed in its assumption that the collaborative process itself provides a means of managing tension. In fact, the approach the CRCST took could be described as confrontational, since it was


303

designed to challenge mindsets and ‘take people out of their comfort zones’. The result was that stakeholders experienced negative affective states as personal values and belief systems that individuals either previously held in esteem or were institutionally dependant on, were brought into question. Stakeholders responded negatively and used their organisational positions to engage in political activities designed to discredit the project thereby satisfying self-interests. The CRCST began to behave as if they were in crisis control mode; they began to respond as if they were in a state of political panic. Their reaction was to narrow stakeholder focus to those they saw as being able to bring about change. The high level of engagement with policymakers (to the neglect of many industry stakeholders) meant that the CRCST gained greater ownership and control of the project. While this decision may have been less than optimal, it was practical and understandable given the circumstances and the perceived political exigencies at the time. As illustrated by Figure 7.2, there were several factors that contributed to stakeholders’ resistance to the Gold Coast Visioning Project that the CRCST were confronted with. As the CRCST negotiated their way through the political minefield that developed, they realised the danger, and increasing likelihood that the Gold Coast Visioning Project could collapse under its own political weight if not carefully managed. Accordingly, the ownership and control the CRCST took over the project was perhaps a prudent (and practical) response, if the project was to survive and realise the objectives that underpinned its existence. Project management believed there was a need for the Gold Coast Visioning Project’s strategic research program, and that research findings arising through the program would serve to benefit the Gold Coast tourism industry and the region. As many industry stakeholders did not share this belief, the CRCST directed their efforts of engagement and dissemination


of research findings at a policymaking level.

304

While the processes the CRCST

engaged in departed from those required of a learning organisation, they did not prevent learning from occurring. The paradigm shift that occurred in GCCC in terms of how they viewed the role of tourism in the local economy reflected organisational learning. Due to the high level of engagement of the GCCC, and the intensity of interaction between GCCC and the CRCST, information was continually being fed to Council, and although the information was not always received willingly, over time elements of the findings had crept into decision making and policy formulation, without decision makers realising that the source of their information was the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This finding is consistent with the findings by Weiss (1980). Contrary to rational decision making models, the process of knowledge acquisition and decision making in policymaking tasks does not evolve in a linear fashion. Knowledge creeps into extant knowledge networks and then serves to inform decision making and policy formulation and explains in large part why policy change occurs incrementally — the individual knowledge that must be present to inform decisions relating to policy are acquired incrementally. This also demonstrates the interrelated and interdependent levels of learning as depicted in Figure 7.1. Organisational learning cannot take place in the absence of group learning; group learning cannot occur prior to individual learning. Given that the social, communication, cognitive and affective factors (see Figure 7.2.) operating between these levels of learning are also constrained by social, communication, cognitive and affective factors operating within each level, the relationship among these levels of learning is not linear. The interrelated and interdependent process of learning creates dynamic tensions across and within each level. The following


305

section describes the influence of factors relating to methods of communication had on the process of learning during the Gold Coast Visioning Project. 13.2.2 Methods of Communication Statements and actions by the CRCST indicate that some stakeholders were seen as being more legitimate than others — a legitimacy based on a perceived ability to bring about change. Subsequently, the CRCST became advocates for policy change, and dissemination efforts became a mask for policy advocacy. Rather than information about what might work and what could be done, dissemination often became an effort to tell what should be done.

This, however, may not

necessarily demonstrate control taken over the project by the CRCST. The results showed that stakeholders frequently indicated a desire for the information to come pre-packaged with meaning. It could be argued that directive dissemination efforts were an attempt by the CRCST to respond to stakeholder needs, bundling information with meaning. Regardless of whether these dissemination efforts were an exercise of control or a response to stakeholders’ needs, a more optimal outcome would have been for stakeholders to develop an understanding of where the new information fit within their existing knowledge structures or how that information might change the way they thought about issues relating to Gold Coast tourism.

In so doing, the

information would be available to draw upon in subsequent decision making tasks. Additionally, the research findings might have been of greater relevance to stakeholders had researchers the opportunity to develop a greater contextual understanding of the stakeholder’s environment, the issues arising from it and how stakeholders were embedded within it. The management processes the CRCST employed did not occasion the interaction needed for participants to experience an


306

inter-subjective time and space through which optimal knowledge acquisition occurs. As Chapter Five shows, it is the sharing of experiences that gives the world its inter-subjective social character.

To achieve mutual understanding, through

which trust emerges, participants engaged in collaborative settings must experience the inter-subjective world that is reached through common experience. Participants in the Gold Coast Visioning Project were presented with limited opportunities to experience the sense of interconnectivity of individual contexts that arises through mutual understanding. The realisation of mutual understanding, however, requires more than an opportunity to develop an interconnectedness of individual contexts; the process demands a willingness of all parties to engage in dialogue and activities through which common experience emerges. The resistance shown by some industry members to engage with the Gold Coast Visioning Project is due to the fact that, broadly speaking, the tourism industry on the Gold Coast is not familiar with the processes or benefits of strategic research (Russell & Faulkner, 1999). One relic of the intense entrepreneurial activity that the Gold Coast tourism industry is characterised by, is the preservation of an individualistic, flexible, experimental, risk-taking culture among many industry participants that fails to recognise the role of strategic research. Another reason the industry fails to appreciate the need and benefits of strategic research is that the industry is predominantly comprised of small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) (West & Bayne, 2002; Moore, 2002; More, 2001). The fact that the majority of tourism businesses are SMEs had a significant impact on the work of the Visioning Project. Managers of SMEs commonly lack the skills (Glen & Weerawaradena, 1996; Robinson & Pearce, 1984) and often lack the inclination (Malone & Jenster, 1991) to engage in strategic planning. They have


307

little opportunity to develop the necessary experience with strategic planning because they rarely have an opportunity to engage with the necessary information (Davis, 1997). This is not to say that strategic planning is not relevant to SMEs, as those that do engage in strategic planning have been found to be the most successful (Bracker & Pearson, 1986; Mazzarol & Ramasehan, 1996).

Furthermore, the processes

underpinning strategic research and planning necessitate reflective and evaluative activities and practices that many organisations at all levels (not just SMEs) have a resistant, if not phobic attitude towards (Wood et al., 2001). The resistance of some industry stakeholders to engage in the evaluative processes involved in strategic research was further compounded by the approach taken by the CRCST. The confrontational approach the CRCST took meant that distrust and suspicion emerged from the negative affective states that frequently underpinned the responses of industry stakeholders. As stakeholders representative of industry were not involved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project in a way that facilitated interaction among them from the outset, they did not know what was wanted nor from whom. Therefore, they were not aware of the agendas driving the project and what specific outcomes the project would deliver. The significance of this was brought to bear at meetings and at the Visioning Workshops. 13.3 Emergent Phenomena at a Group Level Chapter Five introduced the notions of group think (Janis, 1982) and group polarisation (Lamm, 1988; Lamm & Myers, 1978). Group think occurs when groups that value concordance suppress the input of information or values that contradict dominant opinion. The related but distinct phenomenon of group polarisation is the tendency of groups to develop positions and attitudes that are more extreme than those held by individuals before participating in group discussion.

Both these


308

phenomena were demonstrated throughout the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Group think was evident as divergent thoughts were frequently suppressed and amicable interactions were favoured and socially reinforced. Figure 7.4 describes the level of processing that occurs as groups receive new information. This model makes reference to processes that are intra-psychic and, as is true throughout cognitive psychology, can only be studied by inference obtained through observations of overt behaviour. Drawing on the model displayed in Figure 7.4, it is possible to inferentially identify the level of cognitive processing that occurs as group members share common thoughts or thoughts that refect a common value. As groups searched for relevant associations in an existing knowledge network, they correctly identified similar associations and were able to assimilate and accommodate the incoming information through the elaboration of existing knowledge. However, the one-way methods of communication employed by the CRCST circumvented the process of group knowledge acquisition, as there were no overt behaviours observed that indicated group members were engaged in active decision making and negotiation processes — processes that are required to restructure existing knowledge networks in order to acquire new knowledge. The related phenomena of group polarisation occurred at the first workshop, but not so much in thoughts, as in emotions. More than just emotional contagion, where the affective state of one or more individuals may influence the affective state of others, the prevailing mood became more intense as group members expressed with increasing frequency and intensity what appeared to be the dominant mood of the group. Therefore, it was argued that the concept of group polarisation could be extended to include emotional states. It was also shown that there appears to be a diatonic relationship between


309

positive affect and group performance. That is, that with increasing levels of positive affect group performance may improve to some intermediate point, but as the level of positive affect increase past that point, group performance may decrease. It was suggested that this occurs as participants lose sight of the task at hand through their efforts to maintain the prevailing mood.

Again, this demonstrates the

interrelatedness and interdependency among the levels of learning (see Figure 7.1) and how they are simultaneously influenced by social, affective, communication, and cognitive factors operating between and within the levels. What occurs at a group level affects that which occurs at an organisational level, both of which influences, and are influenced by that occurring at an individual level. For example, Visioning Workshops were designed to be a forum in which individuals and groups of individuals might acquire new knowledge in order to extend existing knowledge structures. In turn, this would expand the ways in which workshop participants thought about issues relating to Gold Coast tourism. Thus, by thinking more expansively about issues relating to tourism on the Gold Coast, participants would articulate visions for future development of the Gold Coast as a region and its tourism industry that would be sustainable in economic, social and environmental terms. The assumption was that the vision/s for a preferred future, developed by workshop participants, would direct policymaking and organisational activities required to realise that preferred future. organisational and inter-organisational learning.

This outcome would reflect While this was the intended

outcome, it was not realised. The one-way communication methods used by the CRCST impaired the transfer of knowledge among participants, which inhibited the degree to which individuals acquired new knowledge. The communication methods chosen by the


310

CRCST limited the extent to which group learning occurred, and subsequently, the degree to which organisations might adopt new practices and principles to underpin those practices. Learning was impaired further by the social interactions that took place and the way in which the affective responses of participants reinforced those social interactions. Accordingly, emphasis was placed on maintaining the prevailing mood, which ultimately distracted from the task. What is of interest is that although the processes employed by the CRCST may not have produced optimal learning environments and in many instances enfeebled learning processes, this did not prevent learning from occurring. 13.4 Emergent Phenomena at an Individual Level The paradigm shift that occurred in the GCCC in terms of how they viewed the role of tourism in the local economy reflected organisational learning. However, organisations do not learn per se, but rather, learning occurs within those who constitute their membership.

While stakeholders involved in the Gold Coast

Visioning Project may not have always received research findings willingly, the results showed that over time, stakeholders integrated research findings into their knowledge structures, without being cognizant of where that information originated. The results presented in the previous three chapters demonstrate that, in order to reduce the negative affect experienced when presented with information contrary to existing beliefs or values, some stakeholders disassociated the message from its source of origin. This was demonstrated where either values or beliefs were held in esteem, or where individuals were institutionally dependent on those values or beliefs. The incremental acquisition of knowledge is less challenging to an individual’s existing values and belief system than radical restructuring of knowledge networks; the affective response associated with change is diminished


and new knowledge is able to creep into existing knowledge structures.

311

This

phenomenon of knowledge creep can also be further explained if the role of affect is viewed in conjunction with contributions from the field of cognitive science. In order to do this it is first necessary to return briefly to the fundamentals of cognitive processing. Chapter Four described the conditions present in the restructuring of neural networks. When new information stimulates unfamiliar input patterns of activation, a search for appropriate associations is undertaken (Lehman et al., 1995). The results of this search may reveal insufficient patterns of activation (Wilkes, 1997), conflict between existing associations within the network and incoming information (S. Strauss, 1987), or appropriate patterns of activation with which to assimilate the information (Lehman et al., 1995).

Learning within the network by way of

restructuring results through the process of décalage (Piaget, 1956), which are functional analogies between constructions of different, successive structures. This process gives rise to certain repetitions, which, on some occasions resemble returns to the existing structures, as if some of the alignments formerly attained had to be rediscovered on the successive structures (Eysenck & Keane, 1992). Therefore, knowledge acquisition is a series of decision making tasks to solve problems within neural networks that may occur over time.

The repetitive nature of building

successive neural structures creates a familiarity that may shroud the novelty of the information that is being processed. The more familiar an individual becomes with the information, the greater ownership they take of it as personal relevance is established. Accordingly, the less able they are to attribute that information back to its source. Therefore, cognitive science contributes to an understanding of the way that knowledge creeps into an individual’s knowledge structure since at a neural


312

level, humans are hard-wired to process information in a way that builds successive knowledge structures through repetitive processing of new information. By drawing on the model depicted in Figure 7.3, it was possible to identify junctures where individuals are required to make decisions relating to incoming information and the way in which they might (or might not) incorporate that information into their existing knowledge structures.

As shown in Chapter 12,

incoming information that does not easily assimilate into existing knowledge structures may result in an affective response so strong, that new information cannot be acquired at that point in time. That is, individuals may reject information before they engage in the cognitive tasks underpinning the reflective processes required to determine how or where that information might fit within existing knowledge structures. However, the results showed that over time, as individuals reflect on the information, it is gradually assimilated into their knowledge structures, even though they are not conscious of where that information originated. 13.5 The Relationships among Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilisation The results of this investigation have highlighted the interrelatedness of the levels of learning. Organisations themselves do not learn, rather learning occurs within those who constitute their membership. However, group knowledge is greater than the sum of collective knowledge. Within groups there is the potential for emergent knowledge, which is knowledge that no member held previous to group discussion. However, emergent knowledge, or group learning, occurs symbiotically with individual learning. As new knowledge meets existing knowledge, not only does knowledge complete with knowledge (Knorr-Cetina, 1981), but a form of reasoning also occurs.

This reasoning involves extensive deductive arguments,

particularly those aimed at clarification of the meaning of concepts — a process that


313

allows new knowledge to integrate with existing knowledge. It is the interaction among ideas that leads to the synthesis of new ideas. Analogous to Hegelian theory, the development of contradictions and their solutions evolve as a means of elucidation, which often results as a synthesis of these opposing processes. Accordingly, knowledge creation is a series or flux of transformations pushed by one’s cognitive system and perception of reality, or between coexisting cognitive components. As this push occurs, there is also a demand on the diffusion process as individuals or groups draw in more information, so that contradictions may resolved, thereby allowing knowledge to form. The results here show that some elements of knowledge may be initially rejected in order to resolve contradictions.

These

elements may then be drawn on at a later stage as actions engender further contradictions and individuals seek to resolve these conflicts. These conflicts may not be purely cognitive.

The results show that socio-political, affective, and

communication factors all simultaneously impinge upon this process between and within all levels of learning. New knowledge must be embedded within individuals before it can facilitate group or organisational learning, but learning may only become apparent over time. The findings of this current study also showed that not all organisations participating in a collaborative project, such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project, must learn before inter-organisational learning can take place. Inter-organisational learning may occur (even if it is to learn what not to do) when representatives of organisations come together pursuant to a common goal. The results have also shown the interrelatedness of cognition, communication social contingencies, and affect, but also, have demonstrated that all these factors are influenced and underpinned by individual values and belief systems. As a result of this investigation, the interrelatedness among these factors may be viewed differently


314

AFFECT


Cognition Knowledge Acquisition & Utilisation

Communication

VALUES

Figure 13.2. Model of factors influencing the acquisition, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge.

than was portrayed in Figure 7.2.

Factors that would influence the creation,

diffusion, and eventual utilisation of knowledge can be classified as belonging to one of, not four, but five variables: social contingencies, communication processes, cognitive process, affect, and values, since values underpin an individual, group or organisations’ frame of reference. The manner in which these five factors relate is depicted in Figure 13.2. Cognitive processes, social contingencies, and communication factors are seen as three mutually influential factors.

The


315

intersection of these three overlapping helices is where knowledge acquisition and eventual utilisation nests. It is only when the influence of these three factors is acknowledged and managed effectively, depending on the situation and specific needs accordant to it, that there exists the potential for maximum knowledge gains. However, the degree to which knowledge is acquired is not only dependent upon these three factors. Figure 13.2 shows these three factors as being embedded within affect. The role of affect cannot be separated out from the analysis of human behaviour since it underpins our very existence (Barsade, 2001; Barsade et al., 2000; Eysenck & Keane, 1992, 2000; Forgas, 2000a; Lazarus, 1982; Power & Dalgleish, 1997; Zajonc, 1980, 2000). Consequently, affect is recognised as a factor that permeates all others. Finally, as affect is said to be an expression of underlying belief systems (Forgas & George, in press), which are, in turn expressions of a set of values (McKnight & Sutton, 1994), values are shown to underpin the entire process of knowledge acquisition and utilisation. Relationship building and trust results from individuals gradually exposing more of their values and beliefs through words and actions that are shared over time (Maturana, 1980; Schuetz, 1962, 1964, 1967). It is only when interpersonal relationships develop that individuals are able to approximate the mutual understanding that is necessary to acquire, disseminate or create new knowledge with integrity. Throughout this thesis, these factors have been considered across four levels of learning. The ways in which these factors interact with the levels of learning are portrayed in Figure 13.3. In this instance, social contingencies, communication, and cognitive elements are seen as permeating all levels of learning. However, again, these elements are underpinned by affect, which is an expression of values or belief


316

Levels of Learning Inter-organisational Organisational Group

Cognition

Communication


Individual

AFFECT

VALUES Factors of Influence

Figure 13. Factors influencing the attainment of knowledge across levels of learning.

systems. It is not possible to separate these factors in the diagnosis of a collaborative project since the results have demonstrated strongly the complex way in which these factors interact. This finding has significant practical and theoretical implications, which will be considered in the final chapter. Finally, it was noted that current Australian science policy and structures of the Higher Education system do little to encourage the active engagement of


317

researchers in collaborative projects designed for organisational application. This finding suggests that the current transformation of science (through which organisations such as the CRCST have emerged) is as a consequence of primarily political and economic factors, rather than those that are value-based. That is, that throughout this current transformation of science, it is the traditions of science that are colliding with political necessity.

Accordingly, there are contradictions in

Australian science policy, and the mechanisms that aim to support collaborative arrangements of science.

If the economic and social benefits of integrated

arrangements in knowledge production are to be realised, there is a pressing need to modify the current institution of science and education, and the policies that would underlie it. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the CRC process, specifically the CRCST Gold Coast Visioning Project – from research conceptualisation through to eventual utilisation of CRC output. The Gold Coast Visioning Project has provided the ideal context for a case study analysis of the ways in which the CRC research process can most efficiently blend research with practice. The time frame in which this has occurred has allowed a longitudinal investigation of the processes involved in a tri-lateral arrangement of knowledge production. Additionally, the opportunity to engage in an ethnographic study in an organisational setting occasioned a richness of data unattainable in experimental settings. These characteristics have enabled the development of an understanding of the dynamics of a collaborative research project, and how they evolve over time. The final chapter discusses the theoretical and practical implications of the findings, which will serve to inform further examination of this emerging form of science production.


318

CHAPTER FOURTEEN Theoretical and Practical Implications

The purpose of this study was to begin to develop an understanding of the dynamics inherent in tri-lateral research arrangements in order to inform theories of science policy and Australian policymaking about the Cooperative Research Centre program. This investigative approach to the Cooperative Research Centre’s process required a breakdown of the sequence of stages of knowledge creation, knowledge diffusion and the eventual utilisation of knowledge.

Accordingly, this study

investigated knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation at individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels to identify common elements not only within each level, but also among them. From this perspective, a synthesis of existing literature from the fields of sociology, philosophy, and cognitive, social and organisation psychology resulted in a series of models which informed the subsequent analysis.

These models

acknowledged the interrelated influences of social, cognitive, affective and communication factors — all of which are underpinned by values and belief systems through which events and actions are interpreted.

The results showed that to

understand the dynamics inherent in a collaborative research setting, each of these factors must be acknowledged, not in isolation, but in unison. The results also showed how social, cognitive, affective and communication factors dynamically interact with the interrelated levels of individual, group, organisational and inter organisation learning. The organisational setting in which this investigation occurred has yielded insights that would not have been apparent in experimental settings, since an


319

experimental setting may not reflect the dynamic processes that occur in situ. Accordingly, the findings of this study offer significant contributions to the management of tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production and theories of science policy. In this final chapter the implications of the findings are discussed and possible directions for future research are noted. Subsequently, the limits to the generalisability of the findings are acknowledged. The practical implications of the findings are offered as a model of ‘best practice’, and the relevance of the findings to current Australian Science Policy are discussed. The first section of this chapter discusses the theoretical implications arising through this investigation and the ontological assumptions underpinning this thesis. 14.1 Theoretical Implications An extensive review of the literature showed that no comprehensive theoretical model has been published that describes knowledge acquisition across individual, group, organisational and inter-organisational levels.

Further, it was

argued that such a model must recognise the role of affect. Figure 7.2 depicted such a model and the results demonstrated strongly, not only the role of affect in social, cognitive and communication factors, but more importantly, the interrelatedness of these factors as shown in Figure 13.2. Before discussing the theoretical implications arising from this research, it is appropriate to restate the ontological position taken throughout this investigation and analysis. 14.1.1 Ontological Assumptions The ontological assumptions underpinning the present study are social constructionist. That is, that social life is based around rules, that social realities are socially constructed — social actions have meanings and, perhaps, outcomes which need to be interpreted (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Chalip, 1998; Glaser & Strauss,


320

1967; A. L. Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1994). This thesis is social constructionist in so much as it considers how those participating in the Gold Coast Visioning Project viewed tourism on the Gold Coast, and how they subsequently constructed or reconstructed their world view as a result of research findings, policies, and social interactions that emerged as a result of the project. Social constructionism is generally understood to challenge positivist models (Mulkay, 1991), which presuppose an objective reality (Butterfield, 1957). This thesis retained the positivist view that empirically driven understandings of social phenomena can be used to design or transform social situations and/or conditions. That is, this study retained the positivist presupposition that some processes, although socially constructed, are better than others, and that some outcomes are better than others. Furthermore, this study presupposed that by identifying factors, which will facilitate or inhibit effective processes and outcomes, it is possible to positively alter social situations or conditions. Some postmodernists who carry arguments of social constructionism to a logical extreme, would argue against this proposition. They hold that empirical research cannot obtain objective findings because human subjectivity precludes the possibility of discovering objective truth (e.g., Turner, 1990).

Since objective

knowledge is not feasible, it is argued that normative prescriptions cannot be derived from research (Lyotard, 1994; Baudrillard, 2001; Rosenau, 1992). In an attempt to maintain rootedness and integrity, postmodernists point out that humans have been pushed to a point where there is little reason not to believe that all value-orientations are equally well founded (Spiro, 1996); choice becomes increasingly meaningless. Postmodern thought identifies a world of flux, flow and fragmentation — one without absolute values.

It does not accept ‘scientific rationality’, but places


321

emphasis on the importance of the unconscious and a plurality of viewpoints (Winthrop, 1991). A central tenet of postmodernism is the notion of a shift from a productive, to a reproductive social order in which simulations, models and signs increasingly constitute the world (Lyotard, 1984). Consequently, any distinction between the appearance and the real is lost.

Accordingly, postmodernists might argue that

knowledge designed to inform strategic decision making (e.g., the Gold Coast Visioning Project) is merely an exercise to legitimate the planning process itself. Consequently, at the end of any research project, such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project, there is really no solid information base to inform strategic planning. The more radical position would be that no research base is needed in any case — the outcomes of the Gold Coast Visioning Project, in terms of new policy and processes that have been implemented would have occurred in the absence of the project and its subsequent research findings. From the perspective taken in this thesis, one would have to argue against this. The results have shown that there have been changes to policies and tourism management processes as a result of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. The formation of the Tourism Unit in GCCC, the integration of tourism into the GCCC strategic economic development plan, and recognition of the need for a strategic ‘whole of destination’ approach to management of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination, are but three outcomes that clearly, were research driven. Further, in terms of standard criteria of well-being (e.g., robustness of economy, standard of living, sustainable environmental management etc.,), it can be shown that a Gold Coast which responds proactively to tourism planning — a response which is demonstrably facilitated and improved via research — is better


322

off. Thus, given the objectives of this thesis and the research project that it has studied, it is both plausible and necessary to retain the positivist presuppositions about the normative implications of research findings.

This is true despite the

obvious fact that the processes studied are themselves products of social construction. The results of this study show that one of the key processes of social construction to drive knowledge acquisition is affect. Accordingly, the chapter shifts to a discussion of the ways in which affect influences the acquisition and subsequent utilisation of knowledge, and the theoretical implications of this. 14.1.2 The Role of Affect in Knowledge Acquisition To state that affect shapes the way in which individuals construct their world is in some ways a bold step, since there is little in the literature that acknowledges the role of affect in human reasoning. Since the days of the Stoics, affect has often been detached from deliberations surrounding reasoning and human thought. If, as shown in this study, emotions are underpinned by values and belief systems, then emotions are responses to the subjective perception of value — emotions become value statements.

If values underpin reasoning, then any attempt to understand the

reasoning that occurs as individuals acquire knowledge must therefore consider affect, since emotions are inextricably intertwined with reasoning. This implies that emotions are primordial components of human reasoning. If emotions are elemental components of cognitive functioning, rather than adjunctive events, there is strong justification to employ processes that promote emotional health or well-being in settings such as collaborative arrangements of knowledge production. In the absence of emotional health, an individual’s reasoning capacity as a social being will be compromised. This is because emotions are about


323

something — a value or belief. Emotions are about something that is psychogenic that relates to the way in which an individual contemplates or interprets their world. If emotions are acknowledged as elemental components of cognitive functioning, and emotions are about something (i.e., values), then it follows that values permeate all levels of human functioning. This means that no research or acquisition of knowledge can be classified as being truly ‘objective’, since the concepts humans employ in describing and understanding the world are influenced by individual value systems. Even in the most scientific description of phenomena, there is an element of choice in the way in which phenomena are classified, and whether research findings describing a phenomenon are accepted or rejected (Lyotard, 1984). Fundamentally, humans seek to manage their environment in order to reduce uncertainty (Weiten, 1992). This is necessarily true for all creatures that are characterised by the ability to deliberately change their situation — that is, creatures that are characterised by free will. It can be argued that free will defines our humanness and, in having that free will, humans inevitably seek to change their environment to suit them (Nietzsche, 1968). This being the case, individuals select the concepts to use in order to describe, understand, and make statements about the world ultimately to reduce uncertainty, thereby creating a sense of order through which to negotiate their way through life. The results of this study show that uncertainty will arise not just as individuals attempt to acquire information that does not assimilate easily into existing knowledge structures — it will also arise in stakeholders where they are unsure of the objectives and agendas of those participating in collaborative ventures. Given that the dynamic tension inherent in tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production will give rise to uncertainty, this has significant practical implications for


324

the management of cooperative research projects. This is addressed later in this chapter. The results also show that knowledge is constructed both socially and emotionally.

This finding has significant implications for the ways in which

knowledge acquisition and decision making are investigated. Any investigation that seeks to understand how knowledge is acquired and utilised must consider social and affective influences; any attempt to manage knowledge and maximise the level of learning and subsequent utilisation of it must take emotions and underlying values into account. To ignore the role of emotion and values in the process of knowledge acquisition is to ignore a key component of individual’s reasoning capacity. 14.1.3 The Sleeper Effect Perhaps one of the most significant findings of this study is, that in spite of the massive departure from normative principles of organisational learning, in this case, learning did still occur. Even in situations where information was initially rejected, it was incorporated over time into knowledge structures, typically without the individual or organisation being cognizant of where that information originated. Evidence for the sleeper effect (Hovland et al., 1953) in knowledge acquisition has significant implications for the way in which social cognition is currently understood. The initial rejection of new information seen in this study suggests that individuals experience difficulty incorporating new information that does not fit with existing knowledge structures. If, as argued earlier, emotions are elemental forms of cognitive functioning that represent value statements, then the negative affect experienced by individuals represents their struggle to adopt information that conflicts with existing values or beliefs. The more these values or beliefs are held in


325

esteem, or the more institutionally dependent an individual is on these values, the more challenging conflicting information becomes. As demonstrated in this study, one way to reconcile this inner conflict was for individuals to dissociate the information from the originating source. Through disassociation, individuals free themselves from the need to change significantly their opinion about either the source or the message, thereby, releasing themselves from the negative affective states associated with change. Since the new information is no longer associated with negative affective states, that new information can be incorporated into existing knowledge structures. As an individual reflects on this information, over time they are able to take greater ownership of it as they gradually adjust their existing knowledge structures. This finding has significant implications for the way in which control problems and politics, inherent in organisational life, are interpreted. The political activities and control problems often observed in policymaking or decision making may not be signs of resistance. Rather, they may actually be expressions of the cognitive, emotional and social difficulties an individual experiences as they attempt to come to terms with information that does not easily fit with existing knowledge structures.

This being the case, then this finding has

important implications for the management of projects where disparate parties come together pursuant to a common goal. Rather than seeing lack of stakeholder engagement or commitment to a project as resistance, perhaps it is a demonstration of the difficulties stakeholders experience as they attempt to alter their existing knowledge structures, or frames of reference.

Rather than defiance, apparent ‘resistance’ may signal the fact that

different communication methods are required.

If management of collaborative

research projects were to view ‘resistance’ in this way, it would reduce the need for


326

them to engage in control processes in order to realise a project’s objectives. Rather, in line with current research, the enhancement of communication processes would only serve to increase stakeholder engagement. If project management were to view stakeholder resistance in this way, then the way in information is disseminated to stakeholders would also require rethinking. Rather than intensive half or full-day workshops that predominantly employ one-way communication processes, perhaps workshops need to be broken down into a series of workshops of shorter duration employing two-way communication methods. This would allow all participants the time to reflect on new information before they are required to draw on it order to inform decision making, and would be more amenable to gradual restructuring of the stakeholders’ schemata. Furthermore, a period of reflection would facilitate group learning if participants were given the opportunity to engage in dialogue on each occasion they regrouped. Since there were limited opportunities for those involved in the Gold Coast Visioning Project to engage in double-loop learning, it is not known whether the sleeper effect observed in this study would be as apparent in those instances where two-way communication processes were present. This warrants further investigation. 14.1.4 Cognitive Processes in Knowledge Acquisition The models presented in Figures 7.3 and 7.4 provide a framework in which individuals and groups (respectively) draw in scientific knowledge in order to inform decision making by identifying the junctures where social, cognitive, and affective factors may influence the process. The single-loop learning methods used during the Gold Coast Visioning Project provided limited opportunity to explore cognitive processes in relation to these models. Figure 7.3 did not recognise the possibility for the uptake of knowledge after


327

it was initially rejected. The results of this investigation have demonstrated clearly that the initial rejection of new information does not prevent eventual acquisition. Therefore, the findings of this study have served to inform the frameworks used for this analysis. Figure 14.1 (which is a revision of Figure 7.3) illustrates how, even though new information may be rejected initially, over time there is the possibility that it will be integrated into an individual’s knowledge structures. While the way cognitions are processed can only be inferred through observation of overt behaviours, a greater understanding of the ways in which social, cognitive and affective factors influence the acquisition of knowledge by individuals and groups would be achieved through further research drawing on the models depicted in Figures 7.4 and 14.1. Protocol analysis (Gilhooly & Green, 1996; Green & Gilhooly, 1996) of group decision making tasks in applied settings where doubleloop learning processes are present, would serve to develop an increased understanding of the role of affect in such tasks. Further to this, investigations under such conditions would develop a greater understanding of the ways in which cognitive, social and affective factors are dealt with at the different junctures of cognitive processing described in Figures 7.4 and 14.1. 14.1.5 Group Polarisation and Affect The notion that group polarisation may extend to include affective states warrants further investigation.

Does a curvilinear relationship between positive

affect and group performance repeatedly occur across settings, or is it subject to other factors such as the value placed on the task at hand, or the relationship between the facilitator and the group? To what extent do the relationships among group members affect this proposed curvilinear relationship? It would be useful to identify those conditions that would maximally enhance group performance. Such questions


328

Priming

Associative Networks Incoming Information Search for Relevant Associations

Correct Decision


Assimilate


Accommodate

Reject

Diagnostic Options

Assimilate

No Cognitive Change

Incorrect Decision



No Cognitive Change

Accommodate

Restructure

Décalage

Time

Reflection

Figure 14.1. A model of alternative processes in knowledge acquisition at an individual level as a function of time.

would be well informed by ethnographic investigations in applied settings. 14.1.6 Knowledge Networks and Creativity In Chapter Six the notion of ‘ba’ (Nonaka & Kono, 1998) was introduced.


329

‘Ba’ was defined as the context shared by those who interact with each other, ‘ba’ is the place where they create, share and use knowledge. According to Nonaka and Konno (1998), ‘ba’ can be thought of as a shared space for emerging relationships. This space can be physical, virtual, mental, or any combination of them. ‘Ba’ is created spontaneously, is fluid and constantly in motion.

It can be born and

disappear quickly. Furthermore, the boundary for ‘ba’ is fluid and can be altered as quickly as it is set by the participants. However, as noted by Augier, Sharig, and Vendele (2001) “we have yet to understand what happens inside ‘ba’, and what it is that makes ‘ba’ such an excellent place for knowledge creation” (p.128). As a result of this investigation, it can be argued that what makes ‘ba’ such an excellent place for knowledge creation is the spontaneity that presents itself in everchanging dynamic and interrelated places in time and space. The environment that arises when individuals are able to come together and suspend assumptions and judgements in order to bring their worldview to the surface becomes one that is dynamic, spontaneous and cognitively stimulating.

Furthermore, within this

environment individuals would display a form of acceptance that comes through tolerance. That is, an acceptance of divergence in order to reach a common goal. While ‘ba’ may provide the forum for knowledge creation, its emergence is subject to the cognitive, communication, social and affective factors that have informed this investigation. If ‘ba’ is an environment that creates spontaneity, then it follows that ‘ba’ would give rise to serendipitous discoveries. The question here is what determines whether participants in such a space and time are open to serendipity?

Does the nature of the relationships that must form to create the

requisite environment (i.e., trust, openness, and tolerance) influence the degree to which serendipitous findings are recognised, or are the characteristics of creative


330

people, as presented in Chapter Five, a stronger predictor of this? 14.1.7 The Emergence of Trust in Collaborative Research Settings Trust is central to the study of inter-organisational relations such as those that develop in collaborative research settings (Fulop, 2002; Buttery, Fulop, & Buttery, 1999). If trust is central to the development of an environment that would maximise knowledge creation and subsequent utilisation, then it is important to acknowledge the relationship between trust and mutual understanding. In Chapter Five, it was noted that differences in values, attitudes and beliefs increase the potential for information exchange (Argote, 1982; Belbin, 1993a; Wood et al., 2001) — disparate views promote the search for more information (Chalip, 1985). In turn, an improved understanding of the differing viewpoints develops in the individual (Maturana, 1980; Schuetz, 1962, 1964, 1967). However, understanding does not necessarily imply acceptance. Therefore, in collaborative settings, stakeholders may come to understand differing beliefs and attitudes as they are exposed more to the value systems of others (Fulop, Linstead, & Clarke, 1999). It is through exposure to these different viewpoints through which mutual understanding (Maturana, 1980), and in turn, trust (Kramer, 1999) is developed. The point here is that trust need not evolve through the sharing of commonalities.

Rather, in collaborative settings where

divergent thought must be present if creative problem solving is to occur, trust evolves through understanding.

Certainly, there must be tolerance of differing

viewpoints before understanding is achieved, but tolerance itself is not a sufficient condition to achieve the trust required to develop a truly tri-lateral arrangement of knowledge production. The interrelated role of openness, tolerance and willingness to understand, as an antecedent to trust, requires greater understanding.


331

14.1.8 Scope, Timing and Intensity of Collaboration Bramwell and Sharman (1999) identified three factors that when achieved, would enhance the outcomes of a collaborative arrangement of knowledge production like that of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. These were the scope of collaboration, the timing and intensity of collaboration, and the degree to which consensus emerges. The failure to realise optimally the objectives relating to these factors did have a bearing on the eventual outcomes of the Gold Coast Visioning Project. Therefore, the acknowledgment of these factors alone was not sufficient to achieve optimal outcomes since no recognition was given to the management of socio-political factors inherent in such a collaboration. Accordingly, the degree to which the factors put forth by Bramwell and Sharman (1999) emerge in a collaborative research setting is positively related to the successful management of social, affective, cognitive and communication factors as presented in this thesis. Further research to establish this relationship would contribute to an increased understanding of this emerging form of scientific knowledge production.

This

suggestion is explored further in the next section of this chapter — the generalisability of the findings. 14.2 Generalisability of the Findings Chapter Eight described the limitations of single case study research. It was acknowledged that few human behaviours are unique, idiosyncratic and spontaneous (McKnight & Sutton, 1994; Weiten, 1992). Logic dictates that if we accept the fact that human behaviour is predictable in given situations — a basic assumption of all behavioural research — then we must accept that case studies have value in terms of their potential generalisability.

This investigation sought to develop an

understanding of the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and


332

utilisation in a collaborative research project based on the social sciences. As there may be marked differences between practitioners involved in the natural sciences and those who work within the social sciences, the degree to which findings here are comparable to those which might be obtained in a natural science setting isn’t clear. End-users of research emerging from the natural sciences will have greater procedural knowledge skills than end-users of knowledge arising through the social sciences, since the nature of their work and consequent level of education demands this to be the case.

Therefore, the frames of reference between end-users of

knowledge arising through the natural/biological sciences and researchers may not be as disparate as that between end-users of knowledge emerging through the social sciences and those who would engage in the research. What is clear, however, is that although investigations into the natural sciences will not be as social constructionist as the social sciences, both the natural and social sciences will be subject to similar issues relating to policy, policy formulation, and values. Research suggests that the issues relating to social contingencies and affect are still equally as relevant to collaborative arrangements of knowledge production based on the biological sciences (Shilts, 1987). The history of research on the AIDS epidemic provides an example of the damaging impact of socio-political and affective states on the accumulation and diffusion of knowledge within the scientific community (Shilts, 1987). Because of their mutual distrust and suspicion of each other, researchers at various laboratories were hesitant to share emerging insights and empirical findings.

Subsequently,

progress in understanding the severity of the disease and efforts to determine its origins were impeded. This example suggests that the interrelated influences of affect, social contingencies and methods of communication are relevant to


333

collaborative undertakings in the biological sciences. To accept that emotions are elemental components of cognitive functioning only serves to reinforce the extent to which the outcomes of this research may apply. Further to this, collaborative research settings such as the Gold Coast Visioning Project where the processes required of a ‘learning organisation’ are aspired to, are similar to any organisation that that seeks to become a learning organisation. Therefore, the relatedness among social, cognitive, communication and affective influences are equally as relevant in any organisational setting where disparate parties come together pursuant to a goal. This gives enormous scope to the fields in which future research may replicate the findings of this study – replication being the ultimate form of generalisation. Accordingly, this discussion moves to the practical implications of these findings. 14.3 Practical Implications To acknowledge the interrelated influences of cognition, communication, affect and social contingencies in collaborative research arrangements is but one step towards enhancing the outcomes of such a project, knowing how best to manage this process is another. Based on the findings of this investigation and drawing on the literature, a model of ‘best practice’ is offered (see Figure 14.2). However, there are several caveats that accompany this model. First, the model has been informed by the vast array of literature that describes methods and practices to facilitate group learning. Each component of the model is, therefore, not only informed by current research, but also informs current understanding of group facilitation processes — the findings of this study serve to complement the processes that are known to be effective. The unique combination of this model is that it collates and connects established processes that have previously been approached in isolation, while also


Industry/ Government

Researchers Establish Understanding of Collaborative Process Establish Policy/Research Issues

CRC Establish Research Objectives Identify level & type of Decision making Required

Research Design

Research Findings

Translation of Findings into Recommendations for Alternative Courses of Action

Implementation Systems Research Initiated –

User Initiated -

Journals, Reports, Paper Presentations

Focus Groups, Workshops, Seminars, Briefings, Involving Researcher or Scientific Communicator

Knowledge Utilisation

Figure 14.2. Prescriptive model of collaborative research processes.

334


335

adding to them. Second, the model should not be interpreted as a simple linear process, since there are several conditions that must be present in order to achieve the optimal benefits associated with collaborative research undertakings.

These

conditions, and the ways in which they might best be realised are presented in conjunction with an explanation of the model. The scope, timing, and intensity of the collaboration and emergence of consensus should be approached in accordance with the principles put forth by Bramwell and Sharman (1999).

Furthermore, this should be underpinned by

adaptation of the processes required of a learning organisation (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). Based on the findings of this study, initial stakeholder engagement would be best achieved through promoting the benefits of involvement. Potential stakeholders should be asked to embrace something positive rather than ‘let go’ of something that is or has been of value to them or upon which they are institutionally dependent. Negativity does not promote growth (Rogers, 1993). Rather than emphasise change, the prospect of which brings rise to the negative affective states of uncertainty, distrust and fear, the ways in which the past can be built on to create something of greater value should be emphasised. When individuals experience the negative affective states that accompany the letting go of something that is of value to them, there is the possibility that the individual will interpret the antecedent events that had nothing to do with them, as bearing on them personally (Kramer, 1999). Stated differently, an individual may interpret such events as a challenge to their ego. With the awareness that egos exist, it is possible to anticipate the ways in which they would need to be ‘fed’ in order to best manage them. Fundamental to the success of a collaborative research project is that all


336

participants develop an understanding of values and principles that would underlie such guidelines. Accordingly, as shown in Figure 14.2, it is the starting point of the collaborative research process. It is difficult to achieve a learning organisation approach when group members are not aware of the principles and values underlying it. This suggestion however, involves more than participants being aware of the values and principles – they must develop an understanding of how they and other members of the group negotiate their way through them. Individuals coming together to engage in collaborative arrangements would need to understand how and why their roles might differ from those within their originating organisation.

In other words, those participating in collaborative

arrangements of knowledge production would need to develop an understanding of the ways in which individuals socially and emotionally construct and interpret their worlds. To achieve this, participants need to appreciate the ways in which emotions reflect individual values and belief systems. In developing a greater awareness of their emotional states, participants in such settings would be better equipped to identify the values underlying their thoughts (Schwarz, 1994). This would lead to deeper processing of information, which would, in turn, enhance the opportunity for knowledge to be acquired. Furthermore, those involved in collaborative research settings would need to be aware of the concept of emotional contagion. 14.3.1 Emotional Contagion and the Uptake of Knowledge Emotional contagion means that emotions do not result simply from internal processes. If individuals experience an affective state, but are not cognizant of the fact they may have developed this as a consequence of the emotion of another, they will assume the origin of that feeling comes from within them. Barsade (2001) suggests that this can lead to behaviours based on a flawed attribution or justification


337

to explain their feeling state, which can then influence group dynamics. For example, a group could be unknowingly affected by a particular negative member who causes the whole group to feel some negative affective state, thus leading to possible morale and cohesion problems, unrealistic cautiousness, or the tendency to disregard creative ideas.

Conversely, unrecognised positive mood

contagion in which a euphoric feeling is incorrectly attributed to the task, may lead to over-confidence, group-think (Janis, 1982), or increased pressure for group uniformity.

This may lead to poor performance or produce expectations of

performance that the group may not be able to sustain. Both these effects were apparent in the Gold Coast Visioning Project at both meetings and workshops. In order to optimally utilise knowledge emerging through collaborative research undertakings, these effects must be avoided.

To avoid the negative effects of

emotional contagion, a greater understanding of the conditions and concepts of this phenomenon is required by both facilitators and participants (Barsade, 2001). 14.3.2 Understanding Knowledge Processes The results of this study showed that if research findings are to be maximally acquired and utilised, participants involved in collaborative research settings need to comprehend the difference between procedural and contextual knowledge and the situations where use of the skills associated with each are appropriate. In terms of outcomes, that is the utilisation of knowledge, it is suggested that process is more important than the structure of the network between collaborating parties. It is suggested that a strategy of involvement be employed from the onset. A strategy of involvement refers to both parties sharing the experience of the context in which the knowledge is created. Knowledge acquisition occurs in the course of action and experience. Therefore, practical exercises in “workshop” forums would provide


338

continual education and training experiences as both parties gain an appreciation of each others cognitive processes and further develop and extend their own. Awareness and resolution of conflicting meanings will also provide insight as to individual agendas, values and belief systems, all of which support one’s frame of reference. While this approach is similar to normative models of group facilitation and some forms of action research, it differs in two ways. First, emphasis is placed not just on the need for participants to develop an appreciation of each other’s knowledge structures, but also on identifying the different types of knowledge underpinning those structures, and the situations where use of the skills associated with each are appropriate. Second, the model described in Figure 14.2 differs from other normative models in that achieving this level of awareness and understanding described thus far is antecedent to any other stage in the processes. Once participants develop this level of understanding, it is then possible to identify the issues that would serve to set the research agenda. 14.3.3 Setting the Research Agenda As was evident in the findings of this research, full stakeholder involvement is required during agenda setting if stakeholders are to become fully engaged and take ownership of the research outcomes (Vroom & Yetton, 1973). Additionally, full stakeholder involvement in this process occasions the opportunity for researchers to develop greater contextual knowledge. It also gives end-users of research output an opportunity to enhance their procedural knowledge skills. Once the issues that research is to address have been identified, it is then possible to establish the objectives of the research and the level and type of decision making the research findings are to inform. While this is similar to the normative model put forth by Vroom and Yetton, the findings of this study serve to complement their research in a


339

unique manner. Based on the premise that emotions are elemental components of cognitive functioning that are in themselves value statements, objectives should be first identified as value statements, rather than outcome statements. That is, objectives are identified through first understanding what values are to be reflected in the outcomes.

Outcomes that are consistent with values can then be identified.

Common sense dictates that when stakeholders are aware of the values that underlie a desired end-state, and that there is consistency among them, deeper levels of stakeholder engagement eventuate. Greater awareness of value systems would also facilitate the development of mutual understanding, which is required if knowledge acquisition is to exceed the level of individual learning. Accordingly, it then follows that increased understanding among group members would give rise to more creative thought during decision making or problem solving tasks. Through this process, stakeholders would also identify the levels and types of decision making the research output would inform.

This would serve to increase the researcher’s contextual

understanding and in doing so, assist in the design of research optimally congruent to the needs of end-users. Research findings would then be presented to stakeholders in forums such as focus groups or interactive workshops so that they might deepen their understanding of the research output and determine how this new information might be assimilated into existing knowledge structure. This would mean establishing what the findings mean in relation to the issues first raised, and how best to satisfy the objectives identified.

In other words, dissemination efforts would result in end-users of

research output translating the findings into possible courses of action to achieve the desired outcomes (see Figure 14.2).


340

14.3.4 The Dissemination of Research Output Taking the research findings out to a larger audience involves two implementation strategies appropriate to each audience. Researchers will wish to contribute to the extant body of knowledge with the results of their work through peer-reviewed publication. Industry and government leaders will need to engage in educative processes in order for the courses of action identified to be implemented. In Chapter Thirteen it was noted that the tourism industry is predominantly comprised of SMEs. This is particularly the case on the Gold Coast, a region frequently referred to by locals as ‘a town of small businesses’. Research has shown that managers of SMEs commonly lack the skills (Glen & Weerawaradena, 1996; Robinson & Pearce, 1984) and often lack the inclination (Malone & Jenster, 1991) to engage in strategic planning. They have little opportunity to develop the necessary experience with strategic planning because they rarely have an opportunity to engage with the necessary information (Davis, 1997). This presents a particular challenge for any CRC that seeks to collaborate with SMEs. If research output is to be optimised maximally, not only does the CRC need to disseminate research findings in a way that promote the uptake of knowledge among stakeholders, they must also demonstrate the value of strategic planning and how to engage in it. Interactive workshops and focus groups would provide an ideal forum for these sectors to develop not only an understanding of the value of research output, but also how they might utilise research output in strategic planning. From the results of this study, it is evident that emphasis needs to be placed on industry extension programs if the knowledge emerging from collaborative research projects is to be optimally utilised. As Figure 14.2 illustrates, the utilisation of knowledge then leads to an ongoing process of needing to know more through which the whole


341

process may begin again. In Figure 14.2, the facilitating agency, in this instance a Cooperative Research Centre, is embedded in the entire process. Therefore, the CRC, or any facilitating agency, becomes a conduit through which this process occurs. Their role is to facilitate the linkages between industry, science and government so that a truly tri-lateral arrangement of scientific knowledge production may give rise to an organisation in its own right. Those who would engage in the facilitation of this process would need to exhibit certain characteristics. Facilitating personnel need to be able to accurately read not only the emotional states of others, but also of themselves. They would need to be acutely aware of the political moves being made by stakeholders, and be able to make an educated guess as to when apparent political moves are actually demonstrations of a lack of understanding. The results of this study clearly show that if knowledge is to be optimally acquired and utilised, project management need to understand the sleeper effect, and the ways in which that can be fostered and nurtured. To do this means that facilitators, or project management would need to display patience and resist the temptation to over react to apparent political activity. They would also need to have a set of values and beliefs consistent with the values of a learning organisation and demonstrate a genuine respect for the viewpoints of others. Additionally, they would need to have an understanding of the research process and the procedural knowledge skills that accompany that process, in conjunction with the ability to appreciate the deep contextual knowledge held by the end-users of such research. This chapter commenced with a discussion of the theoretical implications arising from this research and suggested possible directions for future research. The extent to which the findings of this study can be generalised were put forth prior to


342

the previous discussion on the practical implications arising from this investigation. The findings of this research may also serve to inform Australian science policy and the Higher Education system.

Since science policy underpinning the Higher

Education system in Australia is currently under review, such a discussion is both timely and appropriate. 14.4 Science Policy and the Institution of Science Chapter Thirteen showed that Australian science policy is itself in conflict with that which it is espousing to encourage – collaborative research to drive innovation in growth.

From the information presented, it is evident that

policymakers and scientists are struggling to define the configuration of science in a knowledge-based economy. The need to establish communication, collaboration and cooperation between industry and research is acknowledged, but there appears either an unwillingness or inability for either party to liberate themselves from their current institutional roles. Until this occurs, rather than overlapping communication and networks between the sectors, as suggested in the Triple-Helix model (see Figure 2.3), innovation systems can be portrayed as in Figure 14.3. In this latter model, the sectors, while they are interacting, are maintaining their current structures and identities, complete with norms, cultures and reward structures. So why does the distinction remain? Does the distinction between industry and science persist because the current structure of the institution of science, with its rules, norms and procedures renders it incapable to bridge the divide? Benner and Sandström (2000) recently explored the institutional mechanisms that enable or hinder the development of new forms of knowledge production. It was determined that the forces of change and continuity are currently engaged in a process of negotiation about the normative regulation of academic research and that existing


343

Government

Industry

Research

Figure 14.3. A model of university, industry and government relations demonstrating interaction but not interconnectedness.

institutional structures tend to hinder the evolution of new organisational routines. Therefore, it is suggested that the cherished beliefs held within the institution of science are colliding with political necessity. This was demonstrated in Chapter Twelve where it was shown that current science policy underpinning the Australian Higher Education system does not encourage academic researchers to fully engage with industry/government stakeholders. This being the case, what structures and policies need to be altered or instituted in order to facilitate the development of new forms of knowledge production in order to diffuse this collide? What form would the institution of science would take if the distinctions between ‘basic’ and ‘applied’ research were disregarded? 14.4.1 Bridging the Cultural Divide The structure of science as an institution would differ from its current format if the distinction between ‘applied’ and ‘basic’ research were to lose its power to


344

mediate prestige (Chalip, 1985). Researchers would be afforded the same prestige through collaborative and transdisciplinary work as they do within their existing disciplinary structures. Current reward systems have given rise to the ‘publish or perish’ ethos and are in direct conflict with collaborative research.

In many

instances, research outcomes become the property of stakeholders and information deemed ‘sensitive’ is withheld from distribution. In this instance, researchers are denied recognition from their peers and their efforts go unnoticed in academia. Additionally, if the researcher is to display entrepreneurship and commercialise the intellectual property that arises through research, the pecuniary benefits are currently bestowed upon the institution, not the individual. Reward systems within academic institutions would need to focus on the rigor, quality and outcomes of, rather than the ascribed type of research

(i.e., applied versus basic research) or the ability to

publish. In a knowledge-based economy, society depends on science as never before, yet ironically, what scientists do remains largely enigmatic for the broader community (House Committee on Science, 1998).

Currently, the language of

science is virtually incomprehensible to the non-professional (Batterham, 2000; DISR, 2000; House Committee on Science, 1998; Sokal & Bricmont, 1998). During the Gold Coast Visioning Project, there were repeated occasions where stakeholders expressed a need for research to be presented to them in a way that they could understand. Therefore, the arcane nature of scientific language is an issue that needs to be addressed if knowledge arising through collaborative research undertakings is to be optimally utilised. Several policy documents acknowledge the need to create public awareness of the value of science (Batterham, 2000; DISR, 1999; House Committee on Science,


345

1998; Industry Canada, 1997), but for this to happen, it must be presented in a format that is comprehensible to the majority. A recent US report states that Government agencies have a responsibility to make the results of publicly funded research widely available, and that plain English summaries of research detailing its results and implications should be prepared and widely distributed (House Committee on Science, 1998).

The report suggests further that universities should consider

offering, as part of graduate training, the opportunity to take at least one course in journalism or communication whilst journalism faculties should arrange at least one course in scientific writing. These are useful suggestions. The Australian government has recently established the Science and Technology Awareness Program (STAP) to raise community and government awareness of the benefits of science and technology (PMSEIC, 1999a). A recent review of STAP found that whilst there are many successful activities directed towards increasing science awareness in Australia, they are not well coordinated and that the communication, impact and reach of these activities requires improvement (Buchanan Communications Group, 1999).

Furthermore, while several of these

activities exist, it was shown that they are tailored towards the community and education sectors to the neglect of important target audiences such as government and industry sectors (PMSEIC, 1999a). Clearly, transdisciplinary research should be encouraged, and those engaging in it should be recognised and rewarded for their efforts. Transdisciplinary research is thought to be essential to the evolution of creativity and intellect (Snow, 1959), and is key to developing a broad-based understanding, thereby fostering the effectiveness of communication between sectors. The issue of funding leads us to the next point in this discussion. It is logical


346

to suggest that the public purse should continue to fund research for public good. Not all research can be commercialised, and it would be imprudent to think otherwise. However, Pfizer pharmaceuticals claim the difference between academic and industry research is that industry focuses on integrating science into development applications while academia conducts open-ended fundamental investigation (Batterham, 2000). But is this justifiable? Is science any less accountable for the use of research funding to the community than they are to industry? Research has shown that when researchers consider possible applications of their findings, the velocity with which science is generated accelerates (Chalip, 1985). Over the last century, an overwhelming majority of scientific advancements have originated from innovative, interdisciplinary environments, which are vigorously concerned with practical affairs. If there were no distinction between basic and applied science, practical thinking would be encouraged. To apply this thinking to all scientific investigation would greatly facilitate the development of an entrepreneurial culture in academia and serve to develop the linkages between research and industry. Moreover, it would provide a platform from which to inform the wider community of the relationship between outcomes, investment and expenditure. Concurrently, transparent systems that publicise outcomes and accompanying benefits would diffuse the current enigmatic nature of science as perceived by the broader community. Finally, for the dynamics of the linkages formed between science, industry and the government to be fully appreciated and reflected within science policy, these linkages would be viewed not as collaborations, but as a convergence of these sectors. If organisations can be conceptually represented as helices (as in the Triple Helix model), then organisational life can be thought of as spheres of activity. The distinct organisations that emerge through the convergence of overlapping spheres of


347

activity develop as procedural routines from each sector are shared and, in turn centre, on the emergent organisation’s own institutional order. Further to this, it is an institutional order that is accepted and adopted by all actors in that organisational field. As noted in Chapter Thirteen, the formation of these new organisational fields requires more than intellectual acceptance of their utility. It requires a fundamental cultural shift from one sphere of activity to another where existing roles are altered and sometimes diminished on comparison to an individual’s standing in their original organisation. Within this new organisation, all actors are of equal importance, and their contributions would be afforded equal status. The infrastructure of knowledge intensive economies implies an endless transition (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000).

For these new convergent

organisational fields to reach their full potential, an increased tolerance towards the ambiguity and uncertainty (that will arise through the dynamic tensions inherent whenever disparate parties come together pursuant to a common goal) is required. To remove these is to remove the dynamics of a triple-helix system. Tight controls and procedures as seen in the Gold Coast Visioning Project, ensure predictability and occasion ‘comfort zones’ within which one can operate with relatively little effort, but they also mask divergence, obscure serendipity and shroud differences (Sparrow, 1998). Control and procedural mechanisms legitimise the psychological addictions that are employed to ‘buffer’ uncertainties. In turn, these mechanisms blur the awareness of one’s feelings towards, and understanding of a particular issue (Schaef & Fassel, 1988). The findings of this research have demonstrated clearly that knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation designed to drive innovation does not proceed in a linear fashion.

Rather, it is a complex and turbulent process influenced


348

simultaneously by affective, social, cognitive and communication issues that must be acknowledged and appropriately managed if the benefits of tri-lateral arrangements of knowledge production are to be realised. 14.5 Conclusion The Gold Coast Visioning Project provided a unique opportunity to investigate the relationships among knowledge creation, diffusion and utilisation in a Cooperative Research Centres project. The settings in which CRC projects occur occasion a rich setting in which to conduct research studies, such as this study, that researchers would not normally have access to. This is one aspect of the CRC process that is to be commended and demands greater recognition. The opportunity to investigate the ways in which knowledge emerges through cooperative research projects in an applied setting has provided insights that may not have been apparent in an experimental setting, due to the artificial nature of experimental research. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of this emerging form of science production by demonstrating the interrelatedness of cognitive, social, affective and communication influences inherent, not only in the process of knowledge production, but also in the eventual utility of research output. Acknowledgement of these influences has resulted in a series of recommendations for the management and facilitation of collaborative research projects. Additionally, this interrelated perspective has implications for the structure of the tertiary sector, and the policies that would underpin it. In a world where science policies are dictating greater collaboration between science, industry and government, the findings of this research have direct and immediate application to any collaborative project embracing the tenets of a knowledge-based economy. The practical implications that have eventuated through


349

this research give both hope and direction to a process that is applauded and encouraged, yet greatly misunderstood and, it is suggested, the benefits of which have not yet even begun to be fully realised.


350

REFERENCES

Allison, G. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston, MA: Little Brown. Allred, K., Mallozzi, J., Matsui, F., & Raia, C. (1997). The influence of anger and compassion on negotiating performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 175-187. Alter, S. (1999). Information systems: A management perspective (3rd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Amidon, D. (1997). Innovation strategy for the knowledge economy: The Ken awakening. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. Anderson, J. A. (1995a). An introduction to neural networks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Anderson, J. A. (1995b). Learning arithmetic within a neural network. In D. Scarborough & S. Sternberg (Eds.), Methods, models and conceptual issues (2 ed., Vol. 4, pp. 255-300). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Anderson, J. R. (1996). The architecture of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Anderson, M. (1999). The UK Funding Councils Research Support Libraries Programme. In DETYA (Ed.), Australia's information future. Innovation and knowledge management for the 21st Century (pp. 25-32). Canberra: AGPS. Anderson, N. H. (1996). A functional theory of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. ARC (Atlanta Regional Commission). (1993). A Shared Vision for the Atlanta Region: VISION 2020. Atlanta: ARC


351

Argote, L. (1982). Input uncertainty and organizational coordination in hospital emergency service units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 420-434. Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic. Argote, L., Gruenfeld, D., & Naquin, C. (2001). Group learning in organizations. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 369-411). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169. Argote, L., Ingram, P., Levine, J., & Moreland, R. (2000). Knowledge transfer in organisations: Learning from the experience of others. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 1-8. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Organizational learning. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning II. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Ashforth, B., & Humphrey, R. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human Relations, 48(2), 97-125. ASTEC. (1989). The core capacity of Australian science and technology. Canberra: AGPS. Atherton, J. S. (2002, 3 May, 2002). Learning and teaching. Atherton, J.S. Retrieved 18 December, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/learnlea. Augier, M., Sharig, S. Z., & Vendele, M. T. (2001). Understanding context: Its emergence, transformation and role in tacit knowledge sharing. Journal of


352

Knowledge Management, 5(2), 125-136. Ayer, A. J. (1956). The problem of knowledge. London: Pelican. Babbie, E. (1992). The practice of social research (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Backer, T. E. (1993). Information alchemy: Transforming information through knowledge utilization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(4), 217-221. Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Baildon, G. (1998). Mayoral Speech - The launch of the Revisioning Gold Coast Tourism Project. Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Gold Coast. Barker, R., & Camarata, M. (1998). The role of communication in creating and maintaining a learning organization: preconditions, indicators, and disciplines. The Journal of Business Communication, 35(4), 35-49. Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: an exploratory study. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 21(3), 157-161. Barsade, S. G. (2001). The ripple effect: emotional contagion in groups (Working Paper 01). New Haven, CT: Yale School of Management. Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2000). To your heart's content: The influence of affective diversity in top management teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 802-836. Bartsch, P. (1998, 21st October). Looking beyond surf, sun and sex. Courier Mail, pp. 9. Bateson, G. (1973). Steps to an ecology of mind. London: Paladin. Batterham, R. (2000). Investing in knowledge generation for the twenty first


353

century. Canberra: A Chief Scientist Project. Baudrillard, J. (2001). Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings (J. Mourrain, Trans. 2nd ed.). Oxford: Polity Press. Baum, J., & Ingram, P. (1998). Survival-enhancing learning in the Manhatten hotel industry, 1898-1980. Management Science, 44, 996-1016. Beesley, L. G. (2001, 1-5 December, 2001). Bridging the Divide between Knowledge Diffusion and Utilisation in Cooperative Research Settings. Paper presented at the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference, Auckland, New Zealand. Beesley, L. G. (2003). Science policy in changing times: Are governments poised to take advantage of an institution in transition? Research Policy, 32(8). Bekhradnia, B. (1999). The scholarly information crisis in the UK: The Follett Report and beyond. In DETYA (Ed.), Australia's information future. Innovation and knowledge management for the 21st Century (pp. 13-24). Canberra: AGPS. Belbin, M. (1993a). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Belbin, M. (1993b). Team roles at work. Oxford, England: ButterworthHeinemann. Belbin, M. (1997). Changing the way we work. Oxford, England: BetterworthHeinemann. Bendelow, G., & Williams, S. J. (1998). Emotions in social life. London: Routledge. Bendor, J., Moe, T. M., & Shotts, K. W. (2001). Recycling the garbage can: An assessment of the research program (theory of organizational choice). American Political science Review, 95(1), 169-193.


354

Benner, M., & Sandstrom, U. (2000). Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system. Research Policy, 29, 291-301. Berg, B. L. (1998). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Boston, MA.: Allyn and Bacon. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. London: Allen Lane. Bhatt, G. (2000). A resource-based perspective of developing organizational capabilities for business transformation. Knowledge and Process Management, 7(2), 119-129. Bhatt, G. D. (2001). Knowledge Management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques and people. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 68-75. Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, Knowledge work and organisations. Organization Studies, 1021-1046. Boden, M. (1997). Promise and achievement in cognitive science. In D. M. Johnson & C. E. Erneling (Eds.), The future of the cognitive revolution (pp. 55-67). New York: Oxford University Press. Bogden, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36, 129-148. Bracker, J., & Pearson, J. (1986). Planning and financial performance of small, mature firms. Strategic Management Journal, 7, 503-522. Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in local tourism policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 392-415. Brandenburger, A., & Nalebuff, B. (1996). Co-opetition. New York: Doubleday.


355

Brief, A. P., & Walsh, J. P. (1999). Series editors' forward. In L. L. Thompson & J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (pp. xi). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Brooking, A. (1996). An introduction to intellectual capital. Cambridge: The Knowledge Broker Ltd. Brown, B. (1968). The effects of need to maintain face on interpersonal bargaining. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 107-122. Bryant, P. E. (1986). Theories about the causes of cognitive development. In P. Van Geert (Ed.), Theory building in developmental psychology (pp. 167-187). North Holland: Elsevier. Bryson, J. M. (1995). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organisational achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Buchanan Communications Group. (1999). Review of the Science and Technology Awareness Program. Canberra: Department of Industry Science and Resources. Bureau of Tourism Research. (2002). Tourism and the Economy. Bureau of Tourism Research. Retrieved 15 July, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.btr.gov.au/statistics/Datacard/economy.html Burr, S. W. (1995). Sustainable tourism development and use: Follies, foibles and practical approaches. In S. McCool & A. Watson (Eds.), Linking Tourism, the environment and its sustainability (Vol. USDA Technical Report INTGTR-323). Ogden, UT: US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service Intermountain Research Station. Bush, V. (1945). Science: The endless frontier. Washington: United States Government Printing Office. Butler, R. W. (1980). The concept of a tourist area life cycle of evolution.


356

Canadian Geographer, 24(1), 5-12. Butterfield, H. (1957). The Origins of Modern Science. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc. Buttery, E., Fulop, L., & Buttery, A. (1999). Networks and interorganizational relations. In L. Fulop & S. Linstead (Eds.), Management: A critical text (pp. 414-463). Melbourne: Macmillan Education. Calvin, G. (1997, 29 December). The most valuable quality in a manager. Fortune, 279-280. Carnevale, P., & Isen, A. (1986). The influence of positive affect and visual access on the discovery of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 1-13. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Lewes, Sussex: Falmer Press. Caws, P. (1998). Communication lag. Science Communication, 20(1), 14-21. Chalip, L. (1985). Policy research as social science: Outflanking the value dilemma. Policy Studies Review, 5(2), 287-308. Chalip, L. (1998). Grounded theory and qualitative data analysis. HRMAS Newsletters(12). Chalip, L., & Fairley, S. (2000). Positioning the Gold Coast in international tourist markets. Gold Coast: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. Chartrand, T., & Bargh, J. (1999). The chameloeon effect: The perception behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 893-910. Choy, D. J. L. (1992). Life cycle models for Pacific Island destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 30(3), 26-31.


357

Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E. (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cialdini, R., & Trost, M. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In D. Gilbert & S. Fiske & G. Lnidzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 152-192). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Cohen, E. (1982). Marginal paradises: Bungalow tourism on the islands of southern Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2), 189-228. Cohen, J., & Olsen, J. (1975). The uncertainty of the past: Organizational learning under uncertainty. European Journal of Political Research, 3(June), 147 171. Cohen, J., & Olsen, J. (1976). Organizational choice under ambiguity. In J. Cohen & J. Olsen (Eds.), Ambiguity and choice in organizations (pp. 10-23). Bergen, Norway: Universitetsforlaget. Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239-290. Committee on Science - U.S. House of Representatives. (1999). Excerpts from "Unlocking our future: Toward a new national science policy. Science Communication, 20(3), 328-336. Cooper, C. (1990). Resorts in decline - the management response. Tourism Management, 11(1), 63-67. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism (1998). Media Release: Inaugural project manager announced. Gold Coast. Cozzens, S. E., & Woodhouse, E. J. (1995). Science, government, and the politics


358

of knowledge. In S. Jasanoff & G. Markle & J. Petersen & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 533-553). California: Sage. CRCST. (1999). Annual Report - 1998/1999. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism. CRCST. (2000). Annual Report - 1999/2000. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism. CRCST. (2002a). Research partnerships: Outcomes. Retrieved 10 March, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.crctourism.com.au/administration/rOutcomes.asp CRCST. (2002b). Research partnerships: Review and support. Retrieved 10 March, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.crctourism.com.au/administration/rReview.asp Cropley, A. J. (1997). Fostering creativity in the classroom: General principles. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 83-114). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Crosson, M., Lane, H., & White, R. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 524 537. Cvetkovich, G., & Löfstedt, R. (Eds.). (1999). Social trust and the management of trust. London: Earthscan. Davis, J. (1997). Determining promotional effectiveness in small retail firms: An emprical analysis. Mid-American Journal of Business, 12(2), 21-28. Deiley, R. (1998, 16th October). Tracking Coast tourism. Gold Coast Bulletin, pp. 17. Delahaye, B. (2001, 27th July, 2001). The management of knowledge: A systems approach. Paper presented at the School of Applied Psychology, Griffith


359

University, Gold Coast Campus. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Denzin, N.K., & Linoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. California: Sage. DEST. (2002). The Cooperative Research Centres Program. Retrieved 10 March, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.crc.gov.au/faq.htm#Value DETYA. (1999). Knowledge and innovation: A policy statement on research and research training. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. DETYA. (2000). Higher education : Report for the 2000 to 2002 triennium. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. de Vaus, D. A. (1995). Surveys in social research (4th ed.). Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Dick, B., & Dalmau, T. (1999). Values in action: Applying the ideas of Argyris and Schön (2nd ed.). Brisbane, QLD: Interchange Press. DISR. (2000). Australian Science and Technology at a glance 2000. Canberra: Department of Industry, Science and Resources. DIST. (1995). Changing Research Culture. Canberra: CRC Program Evaluation Steering Committee: AGPS. DIST. (1998). Review of greater commercialisation and self-funding in the Cooperative Research Centres Program. Canberra: AGPS. DITR. (2002, 2 July, 2002). Economic impact of tourism. Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources. Retrieved 15 July, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.industry.gov.au/library/content_library/ImpactJuly02.pdf Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2000). Emotional intelligence: A review and evaluation study. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(4), 341-372.


360

Dunphy, D., & Griffiths, A. (1998). The sustainable corporation: Organisational renewal in Australia. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Durkheim, E. (1933). The division of labor (G. Simpson, Trans.). New York, NY: Free Press. Dusevic, T. (1998, 28 September). No turning back. Time. Eckman, P., Friesen, V., & Scherer, K. (1976). Body movement and voice pitch in deceptive interaction. Semiotica, 16, 23-27. Edel, A. (1972). Scientists, partisans and social conscience. Trans-action, 9, 33-39. Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. Elmore, R. (1979). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94(4), 614. Emmy, H., & Hughes, O. (1988). Australian politics: Realities in conflict. Melbourne: Macmillan. Erwee, R. (2000). Business networks: Spanning boundaries and incorporating teams. In R. Wiesner & B. Millett (Eds.), Management and organisational behaviour (pp. 224-237). Brisbane: John Wiley. Etzkowitz, H. (1996). Conflicts of interest and commitment in academic science in the United States. Minerva, 34, 259-277. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National systems and Mode 2 to a triple helix of university-industrygovernment relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123. Etzkowitz, H., & Webster, A. (1998). Entrepreneurial science: The second academic revolution. In H. Etzkowitz & A. Webster & P. Healey (Eds.), Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia (pp. 21-46). New York: State University of New York Press.


361

Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313-330. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., & Healey, P. (Eds.). (1998). Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of insustry and academia. New York: State University of New York Press. Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Creativity and Personality. In M. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, p. 41-66). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition and Emotion, 6(6), 409-434. Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (1992). Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook. London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2000). Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook (4th ed.). London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Faulkner, B. (1998). Gold Coast Tourism Market Analysis (Project 1.1). Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism. Faulkner, B. (2001). Gold Coast Visioning Project: Technical Paper. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism - Work-in-Progress report series. Faulkner, B. (2002). Rejuvenating a maturing tourist destination: The case of the Gold Coast. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism. Faulkner, H. W. (1990). Swings and roundabouts in Australian tourism. Tourism Management, 11(1), 63-67. Feilding, N. G., & Feilding, J. L. (1986). Linking data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fenigstein, A., & Vanable, P. (1992). Paranoia and self-consciousness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 129-138.


362

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Fleck, J. (1997). Contingent knowledge and technology development. Analysis and Strategic Management, 9(4). Forgas, J. (1995). The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 39-66. Forgas, J. (1999). Network theories and beyond. In T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (p. 591-611). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Forgas, J. (2000a). Feeling and thinking: Summary and integration. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (p. 387 406). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forgas, J. (2000b). Introduction: The role of affect in social cognition. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (p. 1-28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forgas, J., & George, J. M. (in press). Affective influences on judgments, decision making and behavior in organizations: An information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Frazier, J. G. (1997). Sustainable development: Modern elixir or sack dress? Environmental Conservation, 24(2), 182-193. Frohock, F. (1979). Public policy, scope and logic. New Jersey,: Prentice-Hall. Fulop, L. (2002, 18 July). The devil is in the detail: Making sense of risk and trust in university - industry partnerships. Paper presented at the Professorial Lecture Series, Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus.


363

Fulop, L., & Linstead, S. (1999). Managing motivation. In L. Fulop & S. Linstead (Eds.), Management: A critical text (pp. 252-298). Melbourne: Macmillan Education. Fulop, L., Linstead, S., & Clarke, R. J. (1999). Decision making in organizations. In L. Fulop & S. Linstead (Eds.), Management: A critical text (pp. 295-334). Melbourne: Macmillan Education. Fulop, L., Linstead, S., & Frith, F. (1999). Power and politics in organisations. In L. Fulop & S. Linstead (Eds.), Management: A critical text (p. 122-158). Melbourne: Macmillan Education. Gardner, H. (1981). Quest for mind: Piaget, Levi-Strauss, and the structuralist movement (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Gardner, H. (1982). Art, mind and brain. New York, NY: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York, NY: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1985). The mind's new science. New York, NY: Basic Books. Gardner, H., Howard, V., & Perkins, D. (1974). Symbol systems: A philosphical, psychological and educational investigation. In D. Olsen (Ed.), Media and symbols (pp. 37-55). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Gardner, H., & Wolf, D. (1983). Waves and streams of symbolization. In D. R. Rugers & J. A. Slobada (Eds.), The acquisition of symbolic skills. London: Plenum. Gavin, D. (1994). Building a learning organisation. Business Credit, 96(1), 19-28. Gavin, D. (2002). A review of the fifth discipline. Retrieved 2nd February, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.rtis.com/nat/user/jfullerton/review/learning.htm#fifthdiscipline Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books. Geoscience Australia. (2002, 16 January 2001). National Mapping Division -


364

Distance. Retrieved 26 February, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.auslig.gov.au/mapping/names/distance.htm Getz, D. (1986). Models in tourism planning. Tourism Management, 7(1), 21-32. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotney, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. London: Sage. Gibson, R. (1997). Rethinking the future. London: Nicholas Brealy. Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 959-974. Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1996). The impact of information on small group choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 132-140. Gilhooly, K., & Green, C. (1996). Protocol analysis: Theoretical background. In J. T. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (pp. 43-54). Leicester: BPS Books. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociological Press. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Glen, W., & Weerawaradena, J. (1996). Strategic planning practices in small enterprises in Queensland. Small Enterprise Research, 4(3), 5-16. Gold Coast City Council. (2001a). Economic development strategy 2010. Gold Coast: Gold Coast City Council. Gold Coast City Council. (2001b, August 24, 2001). Mayor helps launch new tourism push. Gold Coast City Council. Retrieved 28 August, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_print_news.asp?PID=849


365

Gold Coast City Council. (2002a). City Facts. Gold Coast City Council. Retrieved 4 March, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_std2.asp?PID=255 Gold Coast City Council. (2002b). Our community: A social profile of the Gold Coast. Gold Coast City Council. Retrieved 4 March, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_std2.asp?PID=910 Goldberg, A. (1997). Vulnerability and disclosure in science. Science Communication, 19(2), 99-123. Graessner, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Long, D. L. (1986). The construction of knowledge based-inferences during story comprehension. In N. E. Sharkey (Ed.), Advances in cognitive science (p. 125-157). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Green, C., & Gilhooly, K. (1996). Grounded theory: Practical applications. In J. T. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (pp. 55-74). Leicester: BPS Books. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1994). Endogenous innovation in the Theory of Growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 175-192. Gruenfeld, D. H., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1993). Sociocognition in work groups: The evolution of integrative complexity and its relation to task performance. Small Group Research, 24, 383-405. Gunn, C. (1994). Tourism planning: Basics, concepts and cases. Washington: Taylor and Francis. Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.


366

Haberlandt, K. (1994). Cognitive Psychology. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon. Hackman, J., & Morris, C. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction processes, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology (Vol. 8, p. 45-99). New York, NY: Academic Press. Hall, C. M. (1998). Tourism and politics: Policy, power and place. Sydney: Wiley. Hall, R. P. (1986). Understanding analogical reasoning: Computational approaches (Technical Report 86-11). California: University of California, Irvine, Department of Information and Computer Science. Halme, M. (2001). Learning for sustainable development in tourism networks. Business strategy and the environment, 10, 110-114. Hammersly, M. (1996). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. In J. T. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (p. 159-174). Leicester: BPS Books. Hardiman, P. T., Dufresne, R., & Mestre, J. P. (1989). The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices. Memory & Cognition, 17(5), 627-638. Harinck, F., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2000). The impact of conflict issues on Fixed-Pie perceptions, problem solving, and integrative outcomes in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(2), 329-358. Harris, R., & Leiper, N. (Eds.). (1995). Sustainable tourism: An Australian perspective. Sydney: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapsen. (1992). Primitive Emotional Contagion. In M. Clark (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology: Emotion and Social Behavior (Vol. 14, p. 151-177). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.


367

Hayes, M. (1992). Incrementalism and public policy. New York, NY: Longman. Haywood, K. M. (1986). Can the tourism area life cycle of evolution be made operational? Tourism Management, 7(3), 154-167. Healey, P. (1998). Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. Town Planning Review, 69, 1-21. Healy, S. A. (1997). Changing science and ensuring our future. Futures, 29(6), 505-517. Helling, A. (1998). Collaborative visioning: proceed with caution!: Results from evaluating Atlanta's Vision 2020 project. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(3), 335-350. Hertel, G., Nuehof, J., Theuer, T., & Kerr, N. (2000). Mood effect on cooperation in small groups: Does positive mood simply lead to more cooperation? Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 441-472. Higgins, E. T. (1989). Knowledge accessibility and activation. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (p. 75-123). New York, NY: Guilford. Hinsz, V. B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 705-718. Hockey, J. (May, 2002). Tourism - The next decade. Tourism on the Move, 1, 1. Holyoak, K. J. (1985). The pragmatics of analogical transfer. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 19, 59-87. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13, 295-355. House Committee on Science. (1998). Unlocking our future: Towards a new National science policy. Washington: House Committee on Science.


368

Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven: Yale University Press. Howell, D. C. (1992). Statistical methods for psychology. Boston, MA: Kent Publishing. Hubbard, L. A., & Ottoson, J. M. (1997). When bottom-up innovation meets itself as top-down policy. Science Communication, 19(1), 41-55. Hubbard, M. (1999, 15th April). Coast just too 'tacky' says report. Hinterland Sun. Hunter, C. J. (1997). Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 850-867. Industry Canada. (1997). Minding our future: A report on Federal science and technology. Ontario: Industry Canada. Innes, J. E. (1996). Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the American Planning Association, 60(4), 460-472. Innes, J. E., & Boohar, D. E. (1999). Consensus building as role-playing and bricolage: Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65(1), 9-27. Inskeep, E. (1991). Tourism planning: An integrated and sustainable development approach. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Jackson, S. E., May, K. E., & Whitney, K. (1995). Understanding the diversity of dynamics in decision making teams. In R. A. Guzzo & E. a. a. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (p. 204-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186-204. Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.


369

Jarry, D., & Jarry, J. (1995). Collins dictionary of sociology (2nd ed.). Glasgow: Harper-Collins. Jennet, C., & Stewart, R. (1990). Hawke and Australian public policy. Melbourne: Macmillan. Johnston, R. (1998). The changing nature and forms of knowledge: A review. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA). Johnston, R. (1999). The challenge of the knowledge economy: Managing knowledge. In DETYA (Ed.), Australia's information future. Innovation and knowledge management for the 21st Century (p. 51-58). Canberra: AGPS. Johnston, R., & Blumentritt, R. (1998). Knowledge moves to centre stage. Science Communication, 20(1), 98-105. Jones, D., & Ince, E. (2001). The effects of cognitive dissonance on interpersonal perception and reassertion. Current Research in Social Psychology, 7(4). Kaplan, B. (1991). STS, women's studies, and the transformation of the undergraduate curriculum. Science, Technology and Society: Curriculum Newsletter of the Lehigh University STS Program and Technology Studies Resource Center, 86/87, 1-11. Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681-706. Kattenburg, P. (1980). The Vietnam trauma in American foreign policy. New Brunswick: Transaction Books. Katz, D. (1975). Feedback in social systems: operational and systematic research on production, maintenance, control and adaptive functions. In C. Bennett & A. Lumsdaine (Eds.), Evaluation and experiment: some critical issues in addressing social problems (p. 465-523). New York: Academic Press.


370

Kim, P. (1997). When what you know can hurt you: A study of experiential effects on group discussion and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 165-177. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policy. New York, NY.: Harper Collins. Kleket, M. G., Mackay, J. M., Barr, S. H., & Jones, B. (2001). Creativity in the organisation: the role of individual creative problem solving and computer support. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55, 217-237. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). Time and context in practical action: Underdetermination and knowledge use. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 2(3), 143-166. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1995). Laboratory studies: The cultural approach to the study of science. In S. Jasanoff & G. Markle & J. Petersen & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (p. 140-166). California: Sage. Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1980). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the Constructivist and Contextual nature of science. Philadelphia: Pergan. Knott, J., & Wildavsky, A. (1980). If dissemination is the solution, what is the problem? Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 1(4), 537-578. Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. London: Picador. Kohlberg, L., Levine, C., & Hewer, A. (1983). Moral stages: A current formulation and a response to critics. New York, NY: Karger. Köhler, W. (1947). Gestalt psychology: An introduction to new concepts in modern psychology. New York: Liveright. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kramer, R., Newton, E., & Pommerenke, P. (1993). Self-enhancement biases and


371

negotiator biases and negotiator judgement: Effects of self-esteem and mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56, 110-133. Kramer, R. M. (1999). Social uncertainty and collective paranoia in knowledge communities: Thinking and acting in the Shadow of Doubt. In L. L. Thompson & J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (p. 163-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kristeva, J. (1999). Word, dialogue and novel. In T. Moi (Ed.), The Kristeva reader. Oxford: Blackwell. Kruglanski, A. W. (1988). Knowledge as a social psychological construct. In D. Bar-Tal & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), The social psychology of knowledge (p. 109-141). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. LaFollette, M. C. (1998). The transforming political landscape for science communication. Science Communication, 20(1), 5-13. Lamm, H. (1988). A review of our research on group polarization: Eleven experiments on the effects of group discussion on risk acceptance, probability estimation and negotiation positions. Psychological Reports, 62, 807-913. Lamm, H., & Myers, D. G. (1978). Group-induced polarization of attitudes and behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, p. 145-195). San Diego: Academic Press. Larson, J. R., Foster-Fisherman, P. G., & Franz, T. M. (1998). Leadership style and the discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 482-495. Larson, J. R., Foster-Fisherman, P. G., & Keys, C. B. (1994). The discussion of shared and unshared information in decision making groups. Journal of


372

Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 446-461. Larson, J. R., Jr., Christensen, C., Abbott, A. S., & Franz, T. M. (1996). Diagnosing groups: Charting the flow of information in medical decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 315-330. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific fact. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Lawler, R. W. (1981). The progressive construction of mind. Cognitive Science, 5, 1-47. Lazarus, R. (1982). Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. American Psychologist, 37, 1019-1024. Leary, M. (2000). Affect, cognition, and the social emotions. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (p. 331-356). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leedom, D., & Simon, R. (1995). Improving team coordination: A case for behavior-based training. Military Psychology, 7, 109-122. Lehman, J. F., Laird, J. E., & Rosenbloom, P. (1995). A gentle introduction to SOAR: An architecture for human cognition. In D. Scarborough & S. Sternberg (Eds.), Methods, models and conceptual issues (2 ed., Vol. 4, p. 210-254). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Leiber, J. (1978). Structuralism: Skepticism and mind in the psychological sciences. Boston, MA: Twayne Publishers. Lenski, G., & Lenski, J. (1987). Human Societies (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Leonard, D., & Strauss, S. (1997). Putting your company's whole brain to work. Harvard Business Review, 74(4), 111-123. Levine, J. M., Bogart, L. M., & Zdaniuk, B. (1996). The impact of anticipated


373

group membership on cognition. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: The interpersonal context (Vol. 3, p. 531-569). New York: Guilford. Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. (1999). Knowledge transmission in work groups: Helping newcomers to succeed. In L. L. Thompson & J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (p. 163-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Levine, J. M., & Thompson, L. (1996). Conflict in groups. In E. T. Higgins & W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (p. 745 776). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46. Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York, NY: Harper. Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Research Policy, 29, 243-255. Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1996). Emergence of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Science and Public Policy, 23, 279-286. Liebowitz, J. (Ed.). (1999). Knowledge management handbook. Washington, D.C.: CRC Press. Lincoln, J. (1982). Intra- (and inter-) organizational networks. In S. Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (p. 255-294). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of "muddling through". Public Administration Review, 19(Spring), 79-88. Lindblom, C. E. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through. Public Administration Review, 39(6), 517-526.


374

Loewenstein, G. (1996). Out of control: Visceral influences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65(3), 272-292. Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 426-441. Love, G., & Hundloe, T. (1992). Integrating science and economics: A necessary undertaking for environmental assessment. In ASTEC (Ed.), Future Directions for Australian Science: A Tasmanian perspective. Canberra: ASTEC. Lundqvist, L., & Dimberg, U. (1995). Facial expressions are contagious. Journal of Psychophysiology, 9(3), 203-211. Lundvall, B. A., & Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2), 25. Lynch, M. (1985). Art and artifact in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a research laboratory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Lyons, G. M. (1976). United States of America. International Social Science Journal, 28, 26-37. Lyotard, J. (1984). The Postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans. Vol. 10). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Madhavan, R., & Grover, R. (1998). From embedded knowledge to embodied knowledge. Journal of Marketing, 62, 1-12. Maehr, M., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A school-wide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26, 399-427. Malone, S., & Jenster, P. (1991). Resting on your laurels: The plateauing of the owner-manager. European Management Journal, 9(412-418).


375

Mann, L., Chatfield, R., Bain, P., & Pirola-Merlo, A. (1996). A study of success factors and obstacles in collaboration between universities (Working Paper 96-10). Melbourne: Melbourne Business School. Marakas, G. M. (1999). Decision support systems in the Twenty-first Century. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. March, J. C. (1997). Understanding how decisions happen in organizations. In Z. Shapira (Ed.), Organizational decision making (p. 9-34). New York: Cambridge University Press. March, J. C. (Ed.). (1999). The pursuit of organizational intelligence. Massachusetts: Blackwell. March, J. C., & Levinthal, D. A. (1999). The Myopia of Learning. In J. March (Ed.), The pursuit of organizational intelligence (p. 193-221). Massachusetts: Blackwell. March, J. G. (1988a). Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. In D. Bell & H. Raiffa & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive Interactions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. March, J. G. (1988b). Decisions and organizations. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Matheson, C. (1998). Rationality and decision-making in Australian federal government. Australian Journal of Political Science, 33(1), 57-73. Maturana, H. (1980). Biology of cognition. In H. Maturana & F. Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living (Vol. 42, p. 2-57). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing. Mazzarol, S., & Ramasehan, R. (1996). Small business marketing: A comparative


376

study of high and low success firms. Small Enterprise Research, 4(3), 50-64. McCarthy, M. M., & Kuh, G. D. (1980). Dissemination by development. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 10(2), 133-139. McClelland, D. C. (1963). The calculated risk: An aspect of scientific performance. In C. W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity (p. 184-192). New York, NY: Wiley. McElroy, M. W. (2000). Integrating complexity theory, knowledge management and organizational learning. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(3), 195 203. McKercher, B. (1993). The unrecognised threat to tourism: Can tourism survive 'sustainability'? Tourism Management, 14(2), 131-136. McKernan, J. (1991). Curriculum action research: A handbook of methods and resources for the reflective practioner. London: Kogan Page. McKnight, J., & Sutton, J. (1994). Social Psychology. Sydney: Prentice Hall. McNamara, R. (1995). In retrospect: The tragedy and lessons of Vietnam. New York, NY: Times Books. McTaggart, R. (1991). Action research: A short modern history. Geelong, VIC: Deakin University Press. McTaggart, R. (1996). Talk for a Chautauqua: Issues for participatory action researchers. In O. Zueber-Skerritt (Ed.), New directions in action research. London: Falmer. Mentzas, G., Apolostolou, D., Young, R., & Abecker, A. (2001). Knowledge networking: a holistic solution for leveraging corporate knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 94-106.


377

Mepham, J. (1973). The structuralist sciences and philosphy. In D. Robey (Ed.), Structuralism: Wolfson College lectures 1972. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merton, R. K. (1942). Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1, 115-126. Michael, D. (1973). On learning to plan and planning to learn. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Mitchell, J. (1969). The concept and use of social networks. In J. Mitchell (Ed.), Social networks in urban situations (p. 1-12). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Mohammed, S., & Ringseis, E. (2001). Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: The role of inputs, processes and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(2), 310-333. Montangero, J., & Maurice-Naville, D. (1997). Piaget or the advance of knowledge. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Moore, F. (2001). Chairman's Report. In CRCST (Ed.), Annual Report - 2000/2001 (p. 4-5). Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism. Moore, S. (1999). Issues, policy and planning audit (Scoping Study). Gold Coast: National Centre for Tourism. Moreland, R. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in Work groups and organizations. In L. Thompson & J. Levine & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (p. 3-32). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Morgan, M. (1991). Dressing up to survive: Marketing Majorca anew. Tourism Management, 12(1), 15-20. Mulkay, M. (1991). Sociology of science: A sociological pilgrimage. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.


378

Mullen, B., & Cooper, D. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227. Murnighan, J., & Conlon, D. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 165-186. Murphy, P. (1994). Tourism and sustainable development. In W. Theobald (Ed.), Global tourism: The new decade (p. 274-290). Oxford, UK: ButterworthHeinemann. Murphy, S., & Zajonic, R. (1993). Affect, cognition, and awareness: Affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 723-739. Myers, P. (Ed.). (1996). Knowledge management and organisational design. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. National Board of Employment Education and Training. (1996). Patterns of Research Activity in Australian Universities. Phase One: Final Report. Canberra: AGPS. Nelkin, D. (1979). Scientific knowledge, public policy and democracy: A review essay. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 1(1), 123-149. Nelkin, D. (1995). Scientific controversies: The dynamics of public disputes in the United States. In S. Jasanoff & G. Markle & J. Petersen & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (p. 444-456). California: Sage. Nelson, S. D. (1979). Knowledge creation: An overview. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 1(1), 123-149. Neumann, R., & Strack, F. (2000). Mood Contagion: The automatic transfer of mood between persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 211-223.


379

Newman, J. (1987). Learning to teach by uncovering our assumptions. Language Arts, 64(7), 727-737. Newman, J. (2000). Action research: A brief overview. Qualitative Social Research, 1(1), 5-11. Newell, A., Rosenbloom, P. S., & Laird, J. E. (1989). Symbolic architectures for cognition. In M. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (p. 93-132). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Nietzsche, F. (1968). The Will to Power (W. Kaufmann & R. Hollingdale, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. Noakes, S., Quaedvlieg, K., & Chatenay, A. (2001). Gold Coast tourism visioning Background paper, 2001. Gold Coast: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 69(6), 96-104. Nonaka, I. (1999, 2-5 January). Leading knowledge creation. Paper presented at the 32nd International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of 'Ba': Building foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, I. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Nagata, A. (2000). A firm as a knowledge creating entity: A new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1), 1-20. Nooteboom, B. (1999). Innovation and inter-firm linkages: new implications for policy. Research Policy, 28, 793-805. OECD. (1974). OECD examiners report on Science and Technology in Australia.


380

Canberra: AGPS. OECD. (1994). Accessing and expanding the science and technology base. Paris: OECD. OECD. (1996). The knowledge-based economy (OECD/GD (96)102). Paris: OECD. OECD. (2000). Measuring the role of tourism in OECD countries: The OECD manual on tourism sattelite accounts and employment. Paris: OECD. Olsen, J. P. (2001). Garbage cans, new institutionalism, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 95(1), 191-202. Paisley, W. (1993). Knowledge utilization: The role of new communication technologies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(4), 222-234. Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z., & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence and effective leadership. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 22(1), 5-10. Palmer, J., & Richards, I. (1999). Get Knetted: network behaviour in the new economy. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(3), 191-202. Parkinson, B. (1995). Ideas and realities of emotion. New York, NY: Routledge. Parkinson, B., & Manstead, A. (1992). Appraisal as a cause of emotion. In M. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 13). New York, NY: Sage. Pascual-Leone, J. (1984). Attentional, dialectic and mental effort: Towards an organismic theory of life stages. In M. Commons & F. Richards & G. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations: Late adolescent and adult cognitive development (p. 182-215). New York: Praeger. Pascual-Leone, J. (1997). Metasubjective processes: The missing Lingua Franca of


381

cognitive science. In D. Johnson & C. Erneling (Eds.), The future of the cognitive revolution (p. 75-101). New York: Oxford University Press. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluating data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Paulus, P. B., & Huei, Y. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organisations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 76-87. Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman & Sons. Piaget, J. (1936). The origins of intelligence in children. Hammondsworth, UK: Penguin. Piaget, J. (1956). The child and reality: Problems of genetic psychology. New York: Grossman. Piaget, J. (1970). Structuralism. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Piaget, J. (1980). Experiments in contradiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Piaget, J., & Garcia, R. (1987). Psychogenesis and the history of science. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Pidgeon, N. (1996). Grounded theory: Theoretical background. In J. T. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (p. 75-83). Leicester: BPS Books. Pierce, N. R. (1993). Citistates: How urban America can prosper in a competitive world. Washington, DC: Seven Locks Press. PMSEIC. (1998). University-industry linked research in Australia. Canberra: AGPS. PMSEIC. (1999a). Raising awareness of the importance of science and technology


382

to Australia's future. Paper presented at the Fourth Meeting - 26 November, 1999, Canberra. PMSEIC. (1999b). Strengthening the nexus between science and its applications. Paper presented at the Third Meeting - 25 June, 1999, Canberra. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Potter, W. J. (1996). An analysis of thinking and research about qualitative methods. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum. Powell, W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: networks forms of organization. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, p. 295-336). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Powell, W. (1996). Trust-based forms of governance. In R. M. Kramer & T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Power, M., & Dalgleish, T. (1997). Cognition and emotion: From order to disorder. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. Pruitt, D. G., & Carnevale, P. J. (1993). Negotiation in social conflict. Buckingham: Open University Press. Putman, L. L., & Mumby, D. K. (1993). Organizations, emotion and the myth of rationality. In S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotion in organizations (p. 36-57). London: Sage. Queensland Government. (2001). Strategy for growing tourism. Brisbane: Department of Tourism, Racing and Fair Trading. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge. Raven, B. (1992). A power/interaction model of interpersonal influence. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(2), 217-244.


383

Reber, A. S. (1985). Dictionary of psychology. London: Penguin. Reed, M. G. (1997). Power relations and community-based tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(3), 566-591. Reich, W. (1973). People in trouble (P. Schmitz, Trans.). New York, NY: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux. Rietan, T. (1998). Theories of interorganizational relations in the human services. Social Science Review, 72(3), 285-304. Ring, P. (1997). Transacting in the state of exchange governed by convergent interests. Journal of Management Studies, 34(1), 1-25. Roberts, G. (1999). 'Tacky' Gold Coast loses its holiday lustre. Sydney Morning Herald, p. 7. Robinson, R., & Pearce, J. (1984). Research thrusts in small firm strategic planning. Academy of Management Review, 9, 128-137. Roch, S. G., Lane, J. A. S., Samuelson, C. D., Allison, S. T., & Dent, J. L. (2000). Cognitive load and the equality heuristic: A two-stage model of resource overconsumption in small groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(2), 185-212. Rogers, C. (1993). On becoming a person. London: Constable. Romer, P. A. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 117-140. Rosen, L., & Weil, M. (1997). TechnoStress. New York: Wiley. Rosenau, P. M. (1992). Post-Modernism and the social sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rowley, J. (2000a). From learning organisation to knowledge entrepreneur. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1), 7-15.


384

Rowley, J. (2000b). Knowledge organisation for a new millennium: Principles and processes. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(3), 217-223. Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. Spiro & B. Bruce & W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (p. 33-57). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum. Rumelhart, D. E. (1989). The architecture of mind: A connectionist approach. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (p. 133-160). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). A general framework for parallel distributed processing. In D. Rummelhart & J. McClelland & T. P. R. Group (Eds.), Foundations (Vol. 1, p. 45-76). Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1981). Analogical processes in learning. In J. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rumelhart, D. E., Smolensky, P., McClelland, J. L., & Hinton, G. E. (1986). Schemata and sequential thought in PDP models. In J. McClelland & D. Rummelhart & T. P. R. Group (Eds.), Physiological and biological models (Vol. 2, p. 7-57). Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. Russell, R., & Faulkner, B. (1999). Movers and shakers: Chaos makers in tourism development. Tourism Management, 20(4), 411-423. Ryan, N. (1992). Science and technology policy in Australia: Implementation problems and prospects. Griffith University, Brisbane. Sarason, I. G. (1984). Stress, anxiety and cognitive interference: Reactions to tests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 929-938. Sarason, I. G. (1988). Anxiety, self-preoccupation and attention. Anxiety Research, 1, 3-7.


385

Savage, C. (1996). 5th generation management: Cocreating through virtual enterprising, dynamic teaming, and knowledge networking. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. Schaef, A. W., & Fassel, D. (1988). The addictive organization. San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row. Scheidel, T. M., & Crowell, L. (1979). Discussing and deciding. New York, NY: Macmillan. Schein, E. (2002). Coercive persuasion. Society for Organizational Learning. Retrieved 2 February, 2002, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.sol-ne.org/res/wp/10010.html Schoenewolf, G. (1990). Emotional contagion: Behavioral induction in individuals and groups. Modern Psychoanalysis, 15(1), 49-61. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books. Schuetz, A. (1962). Common sense and scientific interpretation of human action. In M. Natanson (Ed.), Collected papers I - The problem of social reality (p. 3-47). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Schuetz, A. (1964). The dimensions of the social world. In A. Broderson (Ed.), Collected papers II - Studies in social theory (p. 20-63). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. Schuetz, A. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Schwarz, N. (2000). Emotion, cognition and decision making. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 433-440. Schwarz, R. (1994). The skilled facilitator: practical wisdom for developing effective groups. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


386

Selin, S., & Chavez, D. (1995). Developing an evolutionary tourism partnership model. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(4), 884-856. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday. Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. London: Nicholas Brealey. Seufert, A., von Krogh, G., & Bach, A. (1999). Towards knowledge networking. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(3), 180-190. Shapira, Z. (Ed.). (1997). Organizational decision making. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sharaf, M. (1983). Fury on earth: A bibliography of Wilhelm Reich. New York, NY: St Martin's Press. Shaughnessy, J. J., & Zechmeister, E. B. (1990). Research methods in psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Shilts, R. (1987). And the band played on: Politics, people and the AIDS epidemic. New York, NY: St. Martins Press. Shove, E., & Simmons, P. (1997). Research contexts and policy knowledge: linking social science research and environmental policy. Science and Public Policy, 24(4), 214-222. Simon, H. (1957). Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York, NY: Wiley. Skyrme, D. (1999). Knowledge networking: Creating the collaborative enterprise. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Slatyer, R. O. (1990). Major new program for Cooperative Research Centres. Search, 21(5), 162-164. Slatyer, R. O. (1992a). Australian science in an industrial context. Paper presented


387

at the Future Directions for Australian Science: A Tasmanian perspective, Canberra. Slatyer, R. O. (1992b). Improving the dialogue between science and government. Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, 68, 83-87. Slatyer, R. O. (1992c). R & D and industrial competitiveness. Search, 23(1), 2-7. Slatyer, R. O. (1993). Cooperative Research Centres: The concept and its implementation. Paper presented at the Research Grants: Management and funding, Canberra. Smith, C., & Lazarus, R. (1993). Appraisal components, core relational themes, and the emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 7, 233-269. Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 1-74. Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sogunro, O. A. (1998). Leadership effectiveness and personality characteristics of group members. Journal of Leadership Studies, 5(3), 26-32. Sokal, A., & Bricmont, J. (1998). Intellectual impostures: Postmodern philosophers' abuse of science. London: Profile Books. Southgate, L. (1999, 6 April). All that glistens is not gold. The Australian, pp. 33-34. Sparrow, J. (1998). Knowledge in organizations: access to thinking at work. London: Sage. Speisman, J., Lazarus, R., Mordkoff, A., & Davidson, L. (1964). Experimental reduction of stress based on ego-defense theory. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 68, 367-380. Spiro, M. (1996). Postmodernist anthropology, subjectivity and science: A Modernist critique, Comparative studies in society and history (p. 759-780).


388

Stake, R. E. (1994). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (p. 236-247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stankiewicz, R. (1998). Science parks and innovation centers. In H. Etzkowitz & A. Webster & P. Healey (Eds.), Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia (p. 133-150). New York: State University of New York Press. Stapel, D. A., & Koomen, W. (1998). When stereotype activation results in (counter) stereotypical judgements: Priming stereotype-relevant traits and exemplars. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34(136-163). Stasser, G. (1999). The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. In L. Thompson & J. Levine & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (p. 49-70). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Stasser, G., Taylor, L. A., & Hanna, C. (1989). Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussion of three and six person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67-78. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81-93. Steptoe, A., & Vogele, C. (1986). Are stress responses influenced by cognitive appraisal? British Journal of Psychology, 77, 243-255. Stern, P. (1994). Eroding grounded theory. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), critical issues in qualitative research methods (p. 212-223). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (p. 125-147). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.


389

Stewart, C. (2001, September 8-9). Gold rush. The Weekend Australian Magazine, pp. 23-26. Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 619-628. Stocker, J. (1997). Priority matters: A review of science and technology arrangements. Canberra: AGPS. Stocking, S. H. (1998). On drawing attention to ignorance. Science Communication, 20(1), 165-178. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 437-446. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (p. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Strauss, S. (1987). Educational-developmental psychology and school learning. In L. Liben (Ed.), Development and learning: Conflict or congruence? (p. 133 157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Susskind, L., & Elliot, M. (Eds.). (1983). Paternalism, conflict and co-production: Learning from citizen action and citizen participation in Western Europe.


390

New York: Plenum. Sveiby, K. (1997). The new organizational wealth: Managing and measuring knowledge-based assets.: Berrett-Koehler. Templeton, R. (2002, 26 June, 2002). Hawaii here we come: Lack of sophistication, aging high rises tarnish our image. Gold Coast Bulletin, p. 7. Tetlock, P. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819-827. Thagard, P. (1989). Explanatory coherence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 435-467. Thagard, P., Eliasmith, C., Rusnock, P., & Shelley, C. P. (in press). Knowledge and coherence. In R. Elio (Ed.), Common sense, reasoning and rationality (Vol. 11). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Thompson, L., Levine, J., & Messick, D. (Eds.). (1999). Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Thompson, L., Nadler, J., & Kim, P. J. (1999). Some like it hot: The case for the emotional negotiator. In L. Thompson & J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations: The management of Knowledge (p. 139-162). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Tideswell, C. (1998). Gold Coast tourism market analysis: Research report 1.1. Gold Coast: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. Tisdell, C. (1990). The nature of sustainability and sustainable development. Discussion Paper No. 48. Brisbane: University of Queensland. Tisdell, C. A. (1981). Science and technology policy: Priorities of governments. London: Chapman & Hall. Tobin, D. (1996). Transformational learning: Renewing your company through


391

knowledge and skills. New York, NY: John Wiley. Tooman, L. A. (1997). Applications of the life-cycle model in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(1), 214-234. Tourism study outdated, says industry spokesman. (1999, 12 May). Gold Coast Sun, p. 4. Towle, A., Goldophin, W., Greenhalgh, T., & Gambrill, J. (1999). Framework for teaching and learning informed shared decision making. British Medical Journal, 319, 716-726. Trist, E. (1970). Social research institutions: types, structures and scale. International Social Science Journal, 22, 301-324. Turner, B. (1990). Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity. London: Routledge. Turner, J. (1982). Toward a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup behavior (p. 15-40). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Turner, J. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (Vol. 2, p. 77-121). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Turner, J. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham. England: Open University Press. Turner, M. E. (Ed.). (2001). Groups at work: Theory and research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Turpin, T. (1997). CRCs and transdisciplinary research: What are the implications for science? Prometheus, 15(2), 253-265. Tversky, A., & Kahnemann, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131. uit Beijerse, R. (1999). Questions in knowledge management: defining and


392

conceptualising a phenomenon. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(2), 143-159. Underwood, J., & Pezdeck, K. (1998). Memory suggestibility as an example of the sleeper effect. Psychodynamic Bulletin and Review, 5, 449-453. van den Heijden, K. (1997). Scenarios: The art of strategic conversion. Chichester: Wiley. Vecchio, R. P., Hearn, G., & Southey, G. (1996). Organisational Behaviour (2nd ed.). Sydney: Harcourt Brace. Vernon, P. E. (1970). Creativity. Hammondsworth, UK: Methuen. von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Vroom, V., & Yetton, P. (1973). Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press. Walker, D. (1997). Review of Science and Technology and the innovation gap in Canada. Winnipeg: Standing Committee on Industry. Warnken, J. (2000). 2.2 Tourist facilities and infrastructure audit. Gold Coast: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weaver, D., & Lawton, L. (1998). Sustainable tourism: A critical analysis. Gold Coast: Griffith University. Weaver, D. B. (1990). Grand Cayman Island and the resort cycle concept. Journal of Travel Research, 29(2), 9-15. Weaver, D. B., & Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism Management. Brisbane: John Wiley.


393

Wegner, D., & Bargh, J. (1998). Control and automaticity in social life. In D. Gilbert & S. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (p. 446-498). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Weiss, C. (1980). Knowledge creep and decision accretion. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization, 1(3), 381-404. Weiss, C. H. (1978). Improving the linkage between social research and public policy. In L. Lynne Jr (Ed.), Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences. Weiss, C. H. (1995). The haphazard connection: Social science and public policy. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(2), 137-150. Weiss, R. (1994). Learning from strangers. New York, NY: Free Press. Weissinger-Baylon, R. (1988). Garbage Can decision processes in naval warfare. In J. March & R. Weissinger-Baylon (Eds.), Ambiguity and command (p. 36-52). Marshfield, MA: Pitman. Weiten, W. (1992). Psychology: Themes and variations (2nd ed.). California: Pacific Grove. West, G., & Bayne, B. (2002). The economic impacts of tourism on the Gold Coast. Gold Coast: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. Weston, P. (1999, 17th & 18th April). Tourism's roller-coaster. Weekend Bulletin, p. 31. Whyte, W. F. (Ed.). (1991). Participatory action research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Wilkes, A. L. (1997). Knowledge in minds: Individual and collective processes in cognition. East Sussex: Psychology Press. Willers, B. (1995). Sustainable development: A new world deception. Conservation Biology, 8, 1146-1148.


394

Williams, K. Y., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77-140. Winthrop, R. (1991). Dictionary of concepts in cultural anthropology. New York, NY: Greenwood. Wittrock, M. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24. Wood, J., Wallace, J., Zeffane, R. M., Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2001). Organisational Behaviour : A global perspective. Brisbane: Wiley. Y2K plan offends paradise. (1999, 20 May). Gold Coast Bulletin, p. 15. Yin, R. (1981). The case crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(58-65). Yin, R. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Zajonc, R. (1965). Social facillitation. Science, 149, 269-274. Zajonc, R. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151-175. Zajonc, R. (1984). On the primacy of affect. American Psychologist, 39, 117-123. Zajonc, R. (2000). Feeling and thinking: Closing the debate over the independence of affect. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (p. 31-58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zeelenberg, M., van Dijk, W. W., Manstead, A. S. R., & van der Pligt, J. (2000). On bad decisions and disconfirmed expectancies: The psychology of regret and disappointment. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 512-541. Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard


Educational Review, 57, 23-48. Ziman, J. (1994). Prometheus bound: Science in a steady dynamic state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine. Boston: HBS Press.

395


APPENDIX A List of Meetings and Interviews Table A.1 List of meetings attended. Date

Participants

Location

09/03/1999

CEDA & CRCST

South Brisbane

09/03/1999

TQ & CRCST

TQ Offices - Brisbane

09/03/1999

CRCST Project Meeting

Brisbane

15/03/1999

TQ & CRCST

CRCST Offices

06/04/1999

Stakeholders Meeting

Conrad Jupiters Boardroom

19/05/1999

TQ & CRCST

CRCST Offices

19/05/1999

Surfers Paradise

26/05/1999

Chamber of Commerce Meeting GCCC & State Development Meeting CRCST & TQ

22/11/1999


23/02/2000 24/02/2000

Economic Employment and Impacts Reference Group CRC Node Meeting

30/06/2000


24/11/2000


25/05/1999

18/04/2001 15/05/2001 16/05/2001

GCCC Chambers - Nerang Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus GCCC Chambers - Nerang Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus GCCC Chambers - Nerang

Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus Stakeholders Meeting Griffith University - Gold Coast Campus Project 2.1 Release to Griffith University - Gold Coast Stakeholders Campus Project 2.1 Release to TQ TQ Offices - Brisbane

396


397

Table A.1 (cont.)

List of meetings attended.

Date 28/05/2001 17/07/2001 18/07/2001 17/11/2001 22/11/2001 23/11/2001 01/12/2001

Participants Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Property Council of Australia Social Impacts Reference Group Gold Coast Visioning Workshop 1 CRCST Project Meeting (Phone Conference) CRCST

Location GCTB Offices - Surfers Paradise ANA Hotel GCCC Chambers - Nerang Parkroyal Hotel n/a CRCST Offices

22/01/2002

Gold Coast Visioning Workshop 2 CRCST

Parkroyal Hotel CRCST Offices

26/04/2002

CRCST

CRCST Offices

25/06/2002

Media Launch of the Final Report of the Gold Coast Visioning Project

Gold Coast Room, Jupiters Casino


Table A.2 List of interviews.

Date

Name

27/02/1999

Prof Bill Faulkner

02/03/1999

Steve Noakes

10/05/1999

Steve Noakes

10/05/1999

Prof Bill Faulkner

05/06/1999

Prof. Terry De Lacy

25/09/1999

Jan Bimrose

26/09/1999

Sir Frank Moore

17/02/2000

Steve Noakes

30/06/2000

Alan Rickards

18/04/2001

Grant Bowie

18/07/2001

Prof Bill Faulkner & Steve Noakes

28/09/2001

Noel Scott

16/11/2001

Steve Noakes

17/11/2001

Mike Jones

17/11/2001

Dennis Chant

17/11/2001

Steve Holle

30/11/2001

Prof Bill Faulkner

01/12/2001

Steve Holle

01/12/2001

Bernie Schulz

22/01/2002

Sheila Davis

22/01/2002

Alan Midwood

22/01/2002

Prof. Beverly Sparks

24/01/2002

Grant Bowie

24/01/2002

Jan Bimrose

20/02/2002

Prof. Laurence Chalip

19/03/2002

Sarah Purchase

25/06/2002

Brad Cox

25/06/2002

Sir Frank Moore

01/07/2002

Alan Midwood

398


399

APPENDIX B List of Equipment

Sound Equipment 6 x Pioneer CT-W205R cassette decks 12 x SM 57 Microphones with table stands 1 x Mitec 24 chanel mixer 1 x Sony M-100MC Microcassette™ recorder 1 x Sony MZ-R700 portable minidisc recorder 1 x Sony ECM –F8 electret condenser button microphone Procedure All microphones were fed into the 24 chanel mixer which fed the signal out to the six tape decks. The left and right chanel of each tapeck recorded separate signal from different microphones simultaneously.

For example, signal from

microphone 1 was recorded on the left chanel of tape deck one; signal from microphone 2 was recorded on the right chanel of each microphone. Each chanel on the mixer was labelled, as were the tape decks so that reference could be made back to which microphone and keyboard the responses were eminating from. The seating arrangements at each session were noted so that comments could be traced back to the individual and the sector they represented (industry, government, research or CRCST) was noted. The recorded signal on each tape was then dubbed onto another cassette, one chanel at a time, to enable transcription of data. demonstrates the seating arrangements and room layout.

Figure B.1


5

4

3

2

1

8

9

10

11

12

400

7

6

Projector Screen

Projector

Computer

6

7

USB Hub

5

8

4

3

2

1

9

10

11

12

Mixer

Tape Decks

Figure B.1 Schematic diagram of Grouputer© microphone and keyboard placements.


401

Computer Equipment All computer equipment was supplied by StepUp systems who were contracted by the CRCST to assist in workshop facilitation. Minimum computing requirements are: 1 x 486 PC, 4 Mb RAM, 120 Mb HDD Windows for Workgroups or Windows 95 +, VGA monitor with minimum 256 colours 1 x mouse, 1 x expansion slot for 4 or 8 keyboards; 2 x expansion slots for 12 keyboards 2 x Serial ports for external mouse RS232 cable. Digital data projector Projection screen

With the Grouputer GDSS, each person in the group has a keyboard which is connected to one of 12 personal windows on a screen.

Each person uses the

keyboard to submit ideas to a ‘Teamspace™’ (see Figure B.2). The user interface allows current inputs and the most recent ideas to be viewed simultaneously on areas called Multiple Active Windows. Each person uses the keyboard to submit ideas to a Team Window, a larger window where all individual contributions collect. These windows are typically displayed on a large screen 2-2.5 metres wide. There is a common focus on the screen projected information. All activity is explicit and nothing is hidden from view.


Figure B.2. Grouputer GDSS user interface. Each keyboard relates to an active window where groups or individuals develop ideas which are then submitted to a Teamspace™ window.

402


403

APPENDIX C Workshop Participants

Table C.1 Workshop Participants – Gold Coast Tourism Futures Workshop (Workshop 1) Name

Position

Philip Adams Linus Bagley Grant Bowie Gail Broome Dennis Chant Tony Charters Peter Colahan Greg Cox Sheila Davis Terry De Lacy Alex de Waal Peter Ellyard Bill Faulkner Barney Foran Elizabeth Fredline Andrew Harris Cara Holcombe Stephen Holle Justin Johnson Mike Jones Alan Midwood Stewart Moore Steve Noakes Ross Preston Bruce Prideaux Alan Rickard Bernie Schulz Noel Scott Ted Shepherd Peter Sippel Paul Stevens

Presenter Industry Industry Government Industry Government Industry Industry Environmentalist CRCST Government Facilitator CRCST Research Research Industry CRCST Government Industry Industry Industry CRCST CRCST Industry Research (not involved with Visioning Project) Government Industry Presenter / CRCST Government Industry Government


404

Table C.1 (cont.)

Workshop Participants – Gold Coast Tourism Futures Workshop (Workshop 1)

Name

Position

Evan Thomas Kerry Watson Cheryl Yamazaki

Government Industry Industry

Table C.2 Workshop Participants – Gold Coast Tourism Visioning Workshop (Workshop 2) Name

Position

Linus Bagley Grant Bowie Gail Broome Sharon Burke Dennis Chant Mark Cooper Greg Cox Terry De Lacy Alex de Waal Dominic Farnworth Bob Hagley Andrew Harris Cara Holcombe Stephen Holle Justin Johnson Mike Jones Garth Keppie John Paul Langbroek Kate Lawrance Kaye Lees Alan Midwood Stewart Moore Steve Noakes Ross Preston Table C.2 (cont.)

Industry Industry Government Government Industry Industry Industry CRCST Government Environmentalist Industry Industry CRCST Government Industry Industry Industry Industry CRCST Industry Industry Presenter/CRCST CRCST Industry


405

Workshop Participants – Gold Coast Tourism Visioning Workshop (Workshop 2) Name

Position

Bruce Prideaux Alan Rickard Lisa Ruhanen Bernie Schulz Noel Scott Ted Shepherd Peter Sippel Evan Thomas Nita Wood Cheryl Yamazaki

Research (not involved with Visioning Project) Government Research (not involved with Visioning Project) Industry Research Government Industry Government Community Industry


406

APPENDIX D Key Stakeholders in the Gold Coast Visioning Project The following list details name and professional affiliation (where provided) of key stakeholders involved with the Gold Coast Visioning Project. This list was provided by the CRCST. Entries in bold type indicate stakeholders’ participation at meetings prior to the Futures and Visioning Workshop∗. Table D.1 Key stakeholders in the Gold Coast Visioning Project.

∗

First Name

Surname

Company

* * * * * *

Rob Gary Barbara Earl Grant Bob

Alcock Baildon Bayne Blight Bowie Brett

Gold Coast City Council Gold Coast City Council

*

S haron

* * * * * * * * * * *

Andrew Dennis Max Bernie Peter Linda Alex Peter Elizabeth Stephen Jan

*

Bob

* * * * * * *

Andrew Cara Stephen John Mike Liz Kaye

Raptis Group Limited Conrad Jupiters Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Department of Tourism, Racing and Fair Burke Trading Carstairs Heilbronn Group Chant Gold Coast Airport Limited Christmas c/-Gold Coast City Council Cochran Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Colahan Australian Vacations Cunningham Gold Coast Tourism Bureau de Waal Tourism Queensland Drake Gold Coast City Council Fredline Griffith Universtiy Gregg Tourism Queensland Grew Gold Coast City Council

Gold Coast International Marketing

Hagley Committee Harris Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Holcombe CRC for Sustainable Tourism Holle Gold Coast City Council Hood John Hood & Associates Jones c/- Gold Coast International Hotel Judd Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Lees Gold Coast Education Network

Indicates attendance at the media launch of the final Gold Coast Visioning Project report.


Table D.1 (cont.)

Key stakeholders in the Gold Coast Visioning Project.

First Name

Surname

Company

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Sir Frank Steve Clare Margie Alan Steve Sandra Grayson Ross Lisa Eddy Bernie Beverley Michelle Nicole

Chairman CRCST Ray Group Pty Ltd Aries Tours Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Midwood Tourism & Development CRC for Sustainable Tourism Gold Coast Tourism Bureau Gold Coast City Council Action International University of Queenlsland Ipswich Campus Gold Coast City Council C/o Grand Mercure Broadbeach Griffith University Beechmont Community Association Bushwacker Ecotours

*

Terry

* *

Guy Jeff

Moore MacRae McFarlane McGregor Midwood Noakes Passaro Perry Preston Ruhanen Sarroff Schulz Sparks Stapelton Thornton Tzanetopolou s West Wilks

*

John

Witheriff

* *

Cheryl

Yamazaki

Margaret Ray Justin David Sue Peter Robert Stewart Ron Christine Claire Soheil Philip Peter Linus Lisa Di Kerry Barrie

Grummitt Hackwood Johnson Power Robbins Sippel La Castra Moore Munn Pritchard Nelson Abedian Adams Aubort Bagley Beesley Berthelsen Brassel Briggs

Gold Coast Tourism Bureau University of Queenlsland Ipswich Campus Gold Coast Combined Chamber of Commerce Seavane Pacific Tours Beechmont Community Association Gold Coast City Council Gold Coast City Council Bushwacker Ecotours Gold Coast City Council Gold Coast City Council Gold Coast Innovation City Limited Gold Coast City Council Level 11, Tourism Queensland House Beaudesert Shire Council Royal Pines Resort Beaudesert Shire Council Sunland Group Centre of Policy Studies LM Investment Management Ltd Binna Burra Mountain Lodge Griffith University Queensland Health Gold Coast Office Gold Coast Airport Limited

407


Table D.1 (cont.)


*

*

First Name Surname

Company

Gail Christopher

Gold Coast City Council Level 10, Westfield Towers

Broome Brown

Sandra

Calabretta

Grande Mercure, Broadbeach

Laurence Tony Ric Mark Malcolm Greg Dawn Simone Sheila Terry Peter Lee Sheranne Stacy Barney Kim Tracy Garth Damien John Paul Kate David Paul Melissa Mary Daphne Ken Ali Lisha Mark Peter Ken Bruce John

Chalip Charters Choate Cooper Cort Cox Crichlow Cuers Davis De Lacy Ellyard Eyre Fairley Field Foran Harrington Harrison-Hill Keppie Knight Langbroek Lawrence Lawrence Lister MacCourt Marquass McDonald Minnikin Morrow Mulqueeny Olsen O'Reilly Oshea Prideaux Punch

Griffith University Tourism Queensland Suites 3-5, Calypso Plaza Watermark Hotel Raptis Group Limited Parkroyal Surfers Paradise Gold Coast City Council Dept of Families, Youth & Community Care Gecko CRC for Sustainable Tourism c/- Saxton Speakers Bureau Tweed & Coolangatta Tourism Incorporated

Sarah

Purchase

Jim Brian

Raptis Ray

Community Development Office CSIRO Griffith University Australian International College of Language Community Development Office The Surfers Paradise Chamber of Commerce Level 11, Tourism Queensland House Outrigger Hotels Bavarian Haus Restaurant Parkroyal Surfers Paradise Break-Even Suite Gold Coast City Council Warner Village Theme Parks Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources Level 10, Westfield Towers Tourism Queensland O'Reilly's Rainforest Guesthouse Gecko University of Queenlsland Short Punch & Greatorix Economic Development & Major Project Directorate Raptis Group Limited Ray Group

408


Table D.1 (cont.)


First Name

Surname

Alan Marie

Rickard Robbie

Noel

Scott

Allan Tom Ted

Roberts Senti Shepherd

Carole

Smith

Andrea Paul Peter

Staines Stevens Stuart

Evan

Thomas

Carmen Jan Peter Kerry Carly Clyde

Tideswell Warnken Watkins Watson Wieland Wild

Suzanne

Wilson

Nita

Wood

Ros

Woodburn

Mary

Woods

Peter

Young

Company Gold Coast City Council Southern Gold Coast Chamber of Commerce Mega Trends Researcher Queensland Police, SEQ Region Tweed Economic Development Coorporation Gold Coast City Council Hotel, Motel & Accommodation Assn of Qld Gold Coast Zone Australian Airlines Gold Coast City Council Gold Coast Airport Limited Environmental Advisory Committee C/O Environmental Planning (PET GCCC) Griffith University Griffith University Paradise Kids Pacific Global Corporation Gold Coast Airport Limited Griffith University Community Alliance for Cultural Tourism & Sustainable Solutions Community Alliance for Cultural Tourism & Sustainable Solutions Beechmont Community Association Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs Gold Coast City Council

409


410

APPENDIX E Research Objectives and Findings Project 1.1 — Market Audit Prof Bill Faulkner Updated May 2001 — Dr Carmen Tideswell Objectives To provide a current appraisal of the Gold Coast’s performance in the domestic and international tourism markets. Research Findings Domestic Tourism Performance • Overnight visits by Australians accounted for 80 per cent of visitation to the Gold Coast in 1999, with approximately 3.5 million domestic visits made to the region resulting in an estimated 15.7 million visitor nights. • Growth in domestic tourism has been strong for the region (1998-99) in terms of both visits (10.8 per cent per annum) and visitor nights (8.9 per cent per annum). The Gold Coast’s growth rates have far surpassed those experienced by Australia as a whole. • Shift-share analysis reveals that the Gold Coast performed particularly well between 1998 and 1999 in attracting visitor nights from the ACT, New South Wales and Queensland markets. • The Victorian market was an area of concern for the region, with declining rates of visitation experienced. While an overall decline in domestic travel by Victorians was reported for Australia as a whole, the Gold Coast’s drop in visitor nights was more substantial than the national levels. • The Gold Coast exhibited strong growth from 1998 to 1999 in domestic visitation for holiday/leisure purposes (23.4 per cent) although this purpose of visit segment declined in Australia as a whole (-1.8 per cent) • Life-cycle segments which exhibited strong growth in terms of visitation to the Gold Coast were the ‘Young singles living alone or in shared accommodation’, ‘Parents with youngest child aged 15 + still living at home’, ‘Older, working, married persons’ and ‘ Young-mid life couples with no children’. • The most popular activities participated in by domestic visitors to the Gold Coast included going to the beach, eating out in restaurants, shopping, visiting friends and relatives and sightseeing. International Tourism Performance • The Gold Coast experienced a decline in the number of international visitors to the region between 1997 and 1999 (-6.2 per cent), despite the fact that overall international visitation grew by 1.5 per cent for Australia as a whole.


411

• The decline in international visitation is attributed largely to the negative growth rates experienced in the Korea, Japan and other Asian markets. • Performance in terms of international visitor nights also lagged behind the national average in terms of growth rates (0.1 per cent for the Gold Coast compared to an 8.5 per cent growth nationally). • Shift-share analysis suggests that the region did, however, perform well in the New Zealand market and the ‘Other’ market category (i.e. Middle East and African markets). The USA/Canadian and Other European markets also emerged as strong growth markets for the Gold Coast region. • Other Australian tourism regions that are strong competitors in these performing markets include: o Sunshine Coast, Queensland in the New Zealand market; o Other parts of Queensland and country NSW, ACT and Tasmania for the ‘Other’ countries market; o Tropical North Queensland, Other regions of Queensland and New South Wales plus Tasmania for the USA/Canadian market; and o Sunshine Coast, Tropical North Queensland and South Australia for the ‘Other Europe’ markets. • The ‘visiting friends and relatives’ market was the only purpose of trip segment to show positive growth in visitation by international visitors to the region between 1997 and 1999. • A 4.5 per cent average annual decline in international visitor nights spent in hotels, motels and resorts was recorded by the Gold Coast from 1997 to 1999, despite the fact that the popularity of this form of accommodation grew in Australia as a whole. • The most popular activities participated in by international visitors to the region included shopping, going to the beach, visiting theme parks, visiting national parks and wildlife parks or zoos. • The decline in international visitors to the Gold Coast is largely due to the decline in first time visitors to the region (-8.8 per cent per annum compared to – 2.1 per cent nationally)


412

Project 1.2 — Issues, policy and Planning Audit (Scoping Study) Stewart Moore Objectives 1. Identify key planning development and marketing issues currently facing the Gold Coast corridor. 2. Identify core stakeholder groups. 3. Identify data gaps and research priorities. 4. Determine outcomes to meet the expectation of stakeholders Research Findings • The revisioning exercise is not well understood by stakeholders and that ownership to the process needs to be fostered as a matter of some urgency • The revisioning project should be renamed “ VISIONING THE GOLD COAST” • State Government and operator commitment to the plan needs to be locked into place before any further research work is undertaken. • A user friendly public consultation process needs to be implemented • The project needs to describe what direct economic or social returns will be delivered by the strategic plans eg increased visitor expenditure, jobs growth, etc. • A suggested framework for the VISIONING project is outlined in the report. The project should be designed to provide a clear direction for the industry but leave action in the hands of operators, industry associations and Government Agencies. • Up front financial commitment to the plan and direct involvement throughout the study is the best means to ensure ownership of the end recommendations. • The Review found that a policy void currently exists with regard to tourism infrastructure, planning, investment, product development and service issues along the Gold Coast corridor • The Gold Coast has traditionally been a private enterprise city which has existed without the need for Government assistance. The political, economic and planning environment has now changed and a more strategic approach to planning is now required. • All stakeholders accept the need for a new approach to how the region is planned and developed. • The region clearly has a major “image” and positioning problem in domestic markets which must be addressed in the CRC research. The deterioration of Surfers Paradise in recent years continues to negatively impact on the region. Operators were unanimous in wanting a globally competitive destination image that provides a point of differentiation from other resort destinations. They are not convinced that the current brand campaign provides this. • The scoping exercise found no evidence to indicate that the regions considerable natural product strengths are being strategically linked, packaged, promoted or planned to bring out and protect their resource potential.


413

• The quality of the beaches and waterways and the role played by the hinterland need to particularly receive priority attention in the visioning process. • No economic framework exists to demonstrate the size or role played by the tourism industry in the region. A model needs to be developed which is consistent with the Queensland treasury model. • With a combined marketing spend in the order of 20-25 million the major theme parks and entertainment venues will continue to dictate how the region is marketed overseas and within Australia regardless of the outcomes of the project. Their continued involvement in the visioning exercise is therefore essential. • More work needs to be undertaken to prepare dedicated marketing strategies for both international and domestic markets and to educate the marketplace about product development, price negotiation, and packaging. Tourism on the Gold Coast is underpinned by small business enterprises. The CRC can play a pivotal role in assisting with ongoing industry education and training. • The much discussed Convention / entertainment /exhibition Centre will continue to generate a deal of political and industry energy over the next twelve months. All stakeholders interviewed supported the need for such a centre. The CRC needs to support Council and industry in identifying a suitable location and way to fund and operate the project. • Industry interviews have highlighted the enormous untapped potential of the Gold Coast Holiday Units / Apartments market. No major research has ever been undertaken on this market. • Major data gaps exist for the day tripper and visiting friends and relatives market, the meetings and conventions market and visitation in the hinterland region. • The following priority research areas are recommended: for the next twelve months:o Image and positioning research o Economic model of Gold Coast Tourism o Hinterland Sustainable Tourism Study o Social impacts of Tourism o Tourism facilities and infrastructure study. • To date, major tourism development and investment has lacked a comprehensive and systematic tourism strategy involving the Gold Coast City Council. An integrated tourism strategy is needed for the amalgamated city to ensure that infrastructure and support services are provided in conjunction with the development of tourism. This should be undertaken in association with the overall Economic Development Strategy currently being prepared by Council’s Economic Development Branch. • There is a need to develop an active campaign as apart of the revisioning exercise to not only sell the benefits of tourism to the local community but to educate the community about the industry. • Tourism and transport are inextricably linked however the major transport strategies do not provide sufficient detail on the needs and impacts of the visitor market. Given the traffic pressures on the Gold Coast this issue needs to be carefully monitored. A dedicated aviation strategy is also required for the region.


414

• The revisioning project needs to develop a regional tourism database which can be added to over time. This database must form the foundation for decision making in the future.


415

Project 1.3 — Short to Medium Term Scenarios for the Gold Coast. Prof Bill Faulkner Research Findings • The Gold Coast is reliant upon the international tourist market for future growth in visitor levels, but the domestic market will continue to account for the majority of visitors. (i.e. the growth will come from international markets, but the ‘size’ will remain with the domestic market) • Growth from new markets can be expected, particularly those where income levels are predicted to grow at strong rates. • The domestic economy is expected to remain relatively strong, within an environment of low inflation and low interest rates. Should it be introduced, it is generally considered that the proposed GST will marginally increase the cost of domestic holidays. While economic theory suggests this could reduce demand, the Commonwealth Government has announced a major new $8 million domestic tourism marketing campaign which should have significant benefits for the Gold Coast as Australia’s premier domestic holiday destination. . • One source of concern for the region is the declining popularity of the Gold Coast with Brisbane residents. Is this market burnt out in terms of what benefits a trip to the Gold Coast provides or is there scope for revival of this market? • Given the consistent growth in the business and convention sectors, the Gold Coast should continue to pursue the addition of a major, convention centre to cater for the MICE market. • For the Gold Coast to optimise its own marketing in the international arena, it must ensure that a suitable range of tourist products and experiences are available to match the needs of individual international markets. The region's core target markets should be identified along with what these markets want from their holiday experience. Only when a suitable match is found between market needs and Gold Coast product offerings should the region's tourism promotional resources be allocated to attracting increased visitor numbers in these segments. • The Gold Coast's performance in the Japanese and Asian markets has been on the decline. The region is no longer performing well with respect to Japanese honeymooners, nor is it succeeding in attracting repeat visitors. • The key to recovery in these markets may be to reconsider the imagery that is portrayed by the region in its current campaigns. At present it appears the Coast is promising everything to all people, but obviously it cannot deliver all things. A more consistent message is needed to attract key markets. The image of 'beaches' is no longer sufficient to attract new visitors. New products and images are needed.


416

Project 2.1 (Report 1) — Positioning the Gold Coast in International Tourist Markets Prof Laurence Chalip & Sheranne Fairley Objectives In order to enhance its position in international markets, the Gold Coast needs to position itself in a manner that is consistent with what consumers in those markets seek from an Australian holiday. This requires Gold Coast tourism marketers to develop marketing communications campaigns that highlight the kinds of activities and benefits that consumers seek. It requires that marketing communications project an appropriate image. Implementation of the recommendations in each country report will optimise the Gold Coast’s competitive position in each market. Research Findings Japan • Appeals to Japanese who are planning a holiday outside Asia should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from Hawaii and the continental United States. This may best be achieved through reference to the unique and attractive experiences that are available. • Appeals to Japanese tourists might also indicate subtly that Australia can offer experiences that compare favourably to those that might be obtained in Europe, but at less time or cost. • Advertising and promotions for the Gold Coast in Japan should highlight five dimensions of activity: (1) opportunities to see a great deal of the city and the surrounding countryside in a short time via day tours and cruises, (2) opportunities to see Australian plants and animals, (3) opportunities to try Australian foods in outdoor settings, (4) the quality of parks and gardens that may be visited when touring and when visiting Australian plants and animals, and (5) the opportunity to visit historic sites and towns. • Conversely, advertising and promotions targeted at the mass market may need to deemphasise swimming, golfing, and gambling. • Marketing communications that highlight adventure activities (e.g., scuba diving, hot air ballooning, 4-wheel drive safaris, sailing horse riding, bungee jumping, surfing, and snorkelling) should be targeted at Japanese consumers who are under the age of 40. • Packages and day tours might include an option to attend an Aussie barbecue. • There may be some value in developing and promoting an opportunity for Japanese visitors to try Australian foods (e.g., kangaroo, crocodile, emu) that are prepared in a traditional Japanese way (e.g., tempura, tepanyaki, sukiyaki). • Packages intended to appeal to men might include opportunities to try local wines and beer. • Packages intended to appeal to women might include opportunities to shop for local arts and crafts.


417

• Gold Coast golf resorts should be encouraged to market golf holidays to Japanese golf aficionados. Optional non-golf activities for women or families who accompany golfers should be made available – generally as day tours that include opportunities to see Australian plants and animals and/or to shop for local arts and crafts. • Gold Coast marketing communications to Japanese should interpret the activities that are highlighted in terms of the opportunity they provide to refresh oneself through the kinds of outdoor experiences that free people from the stress of everyday life. • Sharing with family is worth highlighting, particularly to family markets or when emphasising family based activities. In communications targeted at a mass market, sharing with family is perhaps best demonstrated through visuals of Japanese couples and/or Japanese families with children enjoying a Gold Coast experience. • The Gold Coast can position itself within the context of the kind of benefit that Japanese expect to obtain from a trip to Australia: escape. • Australia’s perceived strengths as a destination (noted in the above two dot points) need to be leveraged to enhance the perceived value of a trip to the Gold Coast – particularly relative to a trip to Hawaii. • The current weakness of the Australian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar might be an effective point of leverage when seeking to engender a sense of value for money in a trip to Australia. • In order to compete more effectively against Hawaii, it may be useful for the Gold Coast to convey to the Japanese market that the Gold Coast is a sophisticated urban destination (albeit one that offers an ideal gateway to Australia’s natural wonders and wildlife). • In order to position more effectively relative to Hawaii, it may be useful to identify one or two unique Gold Coast attractions to promote in the Japanese market as “famous”. • Marketing communications to Japanese about the Gold Coast should seek to build Japanese consumers’ awareness of the Gold Coast as a distinctive Australian destination that ideally fits their preferred activity bundle. • Travel itineraries should include options to visit Cairns (including the Great Barrier Reef), Sydney, Canberra, and Melbourne. • Packages featuring East Coast Australian itineraries should also offer an optional side trip to Ayres Rock. • Local options (for Japanese visiting the Gold Coast) might include day trips to Brisbane. Korea • Appeals to Koreans who are planning an international holiday should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from those markets. This might best be achieved by reference to the kinds of experiences that are available – a positioning element that is considered in the next section. This might also be achieved by reducing the degree to which Australia is perceived to be more expensive or more time consuming to visit. • Travel bundling may also be a useful strategy. Guam could be included as a stopover in an Australian holiday; New Zealand might be included in itineraries for travellers who have previously visited Australia. • Advertising and promotions for the Gold Coast in Korea should emphasise opportunities to see natural wonders, countryside, and wildlife.


418

• Conversely, advertising and promotions geared to the mass market may need to deemphasise golf, gambling, and theme parks (other than the wildlife theme parks). • The beach needs to be positioned as a natural wonder along which to stroll, taking in the local beauty. This needs to be described as part of the “local” experience.. • Packages might include an option to attend an Aussie barbecue. • Packages intended to appeal to men might include opportunities to try local wines and beer. • Packages intended to appeal to women might include opportunities to shop for local arts and crafts. • Packages intended for young people (in their teens and early 20s) might feature the opportunity to bungee jump and/or surf. • Gold Coast golf resorts should be encouraged to market golf holidays to Korean golf aficionados. Those holidays should be designed to fit into typical Korean holiday schedules, particularly for high-income professionals. Optional non-golf activities for women or families who accompany golfers should be made available – generally along the lines of shopping and nature-based tourism options. • There may be some value in developing and promoting an opportunity for Korean visitors to try Australian foods (e.g., kangaroo, emu, crocodile) prepared in a traditional Korean way (e.g., as a Korean barbecue). • Day tours and organised itineraries should be paced to give the impression that the visitors have seen as much as possible in the time available. • Gold Coast marketing communications to Koreans should interpret the activities available in terms of at least one of four core benefits: (1) escape, (2) getting in touch with self and the world, (3) status, and/or (4) sharing with family. • Escape and getting in touch with self and the world are the two benefits that should be highlighted in particular. These can be readily tied into the communications and packages offering the preferred activities described in the preceding section. • Status potentials of a trip need to be conveyed subtly – probably in terms of sharing with friends or colleagues photos, videos and/or souvenirs from a trip to the Gold Coast. This might be portrayed best via clever use of visuals depicting such sharing. • Sharing with family is worth highlighting, particularly to family markets or when emphasising family based activities. In communications targeted at a mass market, sharing with family is perhaps best demonstrated through visuals of Korean couples and/or Korean families with children enjoying a Gold Coast experience. • Communications mentioning Gold Coast beaches should stress that these are second-to-none. • Marketing communications should seek to reduce Koreans’ perceptions that Australia is too far away, and that it is relatively expensive • If food is mentioned, the high quality and variety that are available – rivalling France – as well as unique opportunities (e.g., the opportunity to try Australian foods, as described in the section on activities) need to be noted. • Options in packages that note shopping opportunities need to stress the high quality and variety that are available, and the convenient shopping hours. • Marketing communications to Koreans about the Gold Coast should seek to build Koreans’ awareness of the Gold Coast as a distinctive Australian destination that ideally fits their preferred activity bundle. • Travel itineraries should include an option to visit Sydney.


419

• Local options might include day trips to Fraser Island and to Brisbane. Singapore • Appeals to Singaporeans who are planning a holiday outside South East Asia should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from China and Hong Kong. This may best be achieved through reference to the unique and attractive experiences that are available. • Appeals to Singaporean tourists might also indicate subtly that Australia can offer experiences that compare favourably to those that might be obtained in Europe, but at less time or cost. • Advertising and promotions for the Gold Coast in Singapore should describe the Gold Coast as an ideal base for touring and cruising to obtain the most complete Australian experience possible in the time available. • Specific elements of the touring experience to emphasise are: opportunities to experience rural Australia, opportunities to visit small towns to buy Aboriginal arts and crafts, visiting wildlife, and seeing sheep, cattle, and unusual animals. • Gold Coast theme parks should also be featured in marketing communications, particularly to differentiate the Gold Coast from other Australian destinations, and to add excitement to the images and packages being presented. • Conversely, advertising and promotions targeted at the mass market may need to de-emphasise the sun, surf, gambling, golf and nightlife aspects of a Gold Coast stay. This is not to say that these should be eliminated (since they might form background visuals); it is to say that they should not constitute the focal positioning elements. • Packages targeted at Singaporeans under the age of 35 might benefit by including opportunities to bungee jump and/or to go white water rafting as options. • A package offering the opportunity to choose among sailing, scuba, surfing, snorkelling, and swimming as activities while on the Gold Coast is likely to be attractive to Singaporeans under the age of 30. • Day and overnight tours targeted at Singaporeans who are 18 or 19 years old might include hiking and/or camping experiences. • The Gold Coast should seek to feature as a target destination in itineraries from Singapore that gateway through Perth. • East Coast package itineraries featuring the Gold Coast might include Sydney and/or Melbourne as options. • Brisbane can be featured as a day trip option from the Gold Coast. Taiwan • Appeals to Taiwanese who are planning an international holiday should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from the United States. This may best be achieved through reference to the unique and attractive experiences that are available. • Appeals to Taiwanese tourists might also indicate subtly that Australia can offer experiences that compare favourably to those that might be obtained in Europe, but at less time or cost. • Advertising and promotions for the Gold Coast in Taiwan should describe the Gold Coast as an ideal base for touring and cruising to obtain the most complete Australian experience possible in the time available. • Interesting natural settings are particularly pertinent elements of the tour experience to note.


420

• Dimensional interest can be added to the Gold Coast by featuring opportunities for learning about Australian natural environments, opportunities to visit historic places and museums, and opportunities to obtain novel experiences of nature. • The Gold Coast’s many open air markets (e.g., irregularly at the beaches and also at Carrara) should be positioned as festival-like opportunities for Taiwanese visitors. • The opportunity to experience Australian foods and/or an Australian BBQ should be built into some day-tour experiences available from the Gold Coast. It may also be useful to develop offerings that feature Australian foods (e.g., kangaroo, emu, crocodile) cooked in a Chinese style. • Advertising and promotions targeted at the Taiwanese mass market may need to de-emphasise the sun, surf, gambling, and golf aspects of a Gold Coast stay. • Packages targeted at Taiwanese under the age of 35 might benefit by including opportunities to surf, scuba dive, and go white water rafting. • Packages targeted at Taiwanese men (or couples) might feature optional opportunities to do wine tasting or to visit local breweries. • Promotional literature about the Gold Coast should be formulated to reduce the psychological distance between the two countries. Comparative advertising might suggest that a holiday to Australia (with a Gold Coast component) is a less distant and less expensive (but equally valuable) alternative to a European holiday. • The Gold Coast should seek to feature as a target destination in itineraries that also include Sydney. • East Coast package itineraries featuring the Gold Coast might also include Melbourne and/or Canberra as options. England • Appeals to English who are planning a holiday outside Europe or North Africa should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from the United States. This may best be achieved through reference to the unique and attractive experiences that are available. • Appeals to English tourists might also seek to reduce perceptions of distance and cost. This might be achieved by noting the favourable exchange rate and by pointing out that modern jet travel makes the trip “quick and comfortable”. • Marketing communications for the Gold Coast should position the destination as the ideal base from which to obtain a full and authentic “Australian experience”. This includes the potential to visit the outback, parks, natural wonders, and rainforest. It should note the availability of Aboriginal experiences. In addition, the Gold Coast’s distinctive advantages as a place to experience the best of “Aussie tucker” should be featured. • When it is consistent with the overall theme of an ad, it may be effective to include visuals of an individual, a couple, or a group walking on a Gold Coast beach • Conversely, advertising and promotions targeted at the mass market may need to deemphasise theme parks, surfing, golf, and gambling. • Marketing communications that highlight opportunities to try local wines and beer will be attractive, particularly to males, but would be best included as package options, rather than as necessary inclusions. • The availability of 4-wheel drive safaris from the Gold Coast will be attractive to English travellers – particularly those under the age of 30. It will be particularly useful to highlight this activity in communications intended to encourage this segment to include the Gold Coast in its Australian itinerary.


421

• Some marketing communications targeted at English travellers under the age of 30 should include visuals or mentions of the Gold Coast’s bars and/or nightspots. • Surfing holidays to the Gold Coast will be attractive to a significant portion of young (under 30) English tourists, particularly if instruction in surfing is included as an option. • Gold Coast marketing communications to English should interpret the activities that are highlighted in terms of the opportunity they provide to escape and to learn about the self and the world. • The current weakness of the Australian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar might be an effective point of leverage when seeking to engender a sense of value for money in a trip to Australia. • In order to compete more effectively against the United States as a destination, the quality, range, and unique character of dining experiences that are available on the Gold Coast may need to be featured. • In order to position more effectively relative to the United States, it may be useful to position Australia and the Gold Coast as places that the “in crowd” of world travellers wants to visit. • Marketing communications to English about the Gold Coast should seek to build English consumers’ awareness of the Gold Coast as a distinctive Australian destination that ideally fits their preferred activity bundle. • Travel itineraries should include options to visit each of the capital cities (other than Hobart), as well as Ayres Rock and the Great Barrier Reef. • The Gold Coast’s excellent beaches and holiday atmosphere should be featured as a basis for choosing the Gold Coast over Brisbane as the place to stay when visiting south-eastern Queensland. The ready availability of day trips from the Gold Coast to Brisbane should be noted. Germany • Appeals to Germans who are planning a holiday outside Europe or North Africa should seek to differentiate Australia – and, by extension, the Gold Coast – from the United States. This may best be achieved through reference to the unique and attractive experiences that are available. • Appeals to German tourists might also seek to reduce perceptions of distance and cost. This might be achieved by noting the favourable exchange rate and by pointing out that modern jet travel makes the trip “quick and comfortable”. • Marketing communications for the Gold Coast should position the destination as the ideal base from which to obtain a full and authentic “Australian experience”. • The hinterland needs to be incorporated as a feature of the Gold Coast experience in marketing communications to the German market. • Opportunities to see Australian flora and fauna (at wildlife parks and in natural settings) while on the Gold Coast need to be highlighted in marketing communications. • The rainforest, including the option to visit it via 4-wheel drive, should be featured as a distinctive attraction that a Gold Coast stay can offer. • Day tours (particularly to natural or distinctively Australian settings) should be noted as opportunities for which the Gold Coast serves as an ideal base. • The excellent quality of beaches for walks and for swimming on the Gold Coast should be highlighted as a distinctive point of competitive differentiation for a Gold Coast stay.


422

• Some ads should incorporate visuals showing people (like Germans) enjoying themselves at outdoor restaurants on the Gold Coast – particularly if the visuals can also give the impression that the dining experience is providing good views of the beach or of other natural wonders. • Scuba diving opportunities from the Gold Coast may be attractive options for German visitors, particularly those under the age of 35 years. • Ads and packages designed to attract German visitors should deemphasise surfing, the theme parks (except for the domestic wildlife component), golf, and gambling opportunities. • Gold Coast marketing communications to Germans should interpret the activities that are highlighted in terms of the opportunity they provide to refresh oneself through the kinds of experience that free people from the stress of everyday life. • Gold Coast marketing communications should interpret the various activities as ideal opportunities to get in touch with oneself and the world. • The current weakness of the Australian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar might be an effective point of leverage when seeking to engender a sense of value for money in a trip to Australia. • In order to compete more effectively against the United States as a destination, the quality, range, and unique character of dining experiences that are available on the Gold Coast may need to be featured. • The ready availability and diversity of tour packages that are available from the Gold Coast should be featured in some marketing communications in Germany. • In order to position more effectively relative to the United States, it may be useful to position Australia and the Gold Coast as places that the “in crowd” of world travellers wants to visit. • Marketing communications to the German market about the Gold Coast should seek to build German consumers’ awareness of the Gold Coast as a distinctive Australian destination that ideally fits their preferred activity bundle. • Travel itineraries should include options to visit a choice of several capital cities (other than Hobart), as well as Ayres Rock (via Alice Springs) and the Great Barrier Reef. • The Gold Coast’s excellent beaches, wildlife parks, and proximity to the hinterland should be featured as a basis for choosing the Gold Coast over Brisbane as the place to stay when visiting south-eastern Queensland. The ready availability of day trips from the Gold Coast to Brisbane should be noted. United States • Appeals to Americans who are planning an international holiday should seek to bring or keep Australia (and by extension, the Gold Coast) in the consideration sets of long haul American travellers. • Marketing communications about travel to Australia (and by extension the Gold Coast) should seek to reduce the perception of distance, and should emphasise value for money. The recent woes of the Australian dollar may be one point of leverage. • Americans with an interest in Australia will be more likely to convert to travel if offered a promotional airfare and the prospect of a value-for-money travel experience. • Package tours and visits to “touristy” locations will not be appealing. • Opportunities to see “the unusual”, to experience local culture, to see historical sights, and to obtain a sense of adventure will be important to American travellers.


423

• Marketing communications to Americans about the Gold Coast should not feature the Gold Coast’s popularity as a resort destination. • Marketing communications to Americans should note the casual atmosphere of the Gold Coast, and should suggest that the Gold Coast is an ideal place to mix freely with Australians and to experience “an Australian way of life”. • References to opportunities available at or near the Gold Coast should give a sense of adventure and the unusual. Specific points of reference might include opportunities to visit hinterland rainforests, to see Australia’s unique flora and fauna, and to see historical sights (such as old Queenslander homes or Aboriginal sites). • Communications should suggest that the Gold Coast’s proximity to a range of adventures and unique opportunities, combined with good quality at low cost, will provide outstanding value for money. • Inclusion of a discounted Gold Coast extension as an option on a promotional fare from the United States will enhance the destination’s attractiveness to Americans. This might entail an optional “Gold Coast extension” onto fares into Sydney. Alternatively, it could entail an inclusive land transfer from the airport in Brisbane to the Gold Coast. (Under present air routings, this latter option would be limited to itineraries transiting through Auckland). It would be particularly appealing if the discounted extension or land transfer option were presented as “a chance to get off the beaten track”. • The Gold Coast should be positioned in the American market in terms that emphasise the novelty of experiences that are available. Novelty can be demonstrated in terms of lifestyle, wildlife, and things to see or do that are beyond the normal tourist attractions. • Messages about the Gold Coast should give a sense that the Gold Coast is a safe and welcoming place offering familiar amenities. • Messages about the Gold Coast should suggest that there is plenty to see and do, all of which will provide great stories to tell. • The Gold Coast should position itself within the context of Australia’s perceived strengths as a destination for Americans. These include the exhilaration and security that are potential in a visit. • Marketing communications should suggest that the Gold Coast is the ideal place to obtain a complete “Australian experience”. • Some effort needs to be expended to work with travel writers to provide descriptions (and visuals) of the Gold Coast that are consistent with the positioning aspects suggested above. • The importance of articles in travel magazines is reaffirmed in these data. It will be useful to work with travel journalists (e.g., via the VJP) to develop stories that are consistent with the positioning described above. • The significant role played by travel agents and national tourist offices is affirmed. This suggests the value of educating travel agents and tourist office personnel about the Gold Coast, and doing so in a manner that will assist them to describe the Gold Coast in terms consistent with the positioning described above


424

Project 2.1 (Report 2) — Positioning the Gold Coast in the Domestic Tourist Market Dr Tracey Harrison-Hill, Sheranne Fairley & Prof Laurence Chalip Objectives In order to enhance its position in domestic markets, the Gold Coast needs to position itself in a manner that is consistent with what consumers in those markets seek from an Australian holiday. This requires Gold Coast tourism marketers to develop marketing communication campaigns that highlight the image and kinds of activities that consumers seek. It requires that marketing communications project an appropriate image. While specific recommendations have been developed for each of the core domestic markets, the communications for Sydney and Melbourne within each lifestage segment are very similar. It may be possible to use the same communication message and imagery but adapt the destination offerings to suit the preferred method of transport. The Brisbane market was also quite similar to the Southern markets across the lifestage segments but the novelty of the destination needs to also be considered within this market. Research Findings Sydney The perception by Sydney respondents that the Gold Coast is a highly developed destination is emphatic. Their very low knowledge of the hinterland is apparent in the image elements that have come to the fore. Yet they desire the activities and experiences that can be found in the hinterland. Very few Australian destinations can boast excellent beaches, comparable rainforest and the shopping, dining and themepark opportunities within such easy reach. This suggests the value of using the mix of beach and hinterland activities as a point of differentiation for the Gold Coast. The five top-most desired activities by the Sydney respondents were: • Visiting the Rainforest • Swimming • Visiting the Reef • Sightseeing • Eating, Drinking and Restaurants Melbourne It should be noted that with the combination of the beach, the hinterland, shopping, themeparks and restaurants, the Gold Coast has a particularly desirable product. This suggests the value of using the mix of beach and hinterland activities as a point of differentiation for the Gold Coast.


425

The five top-most desired activities by the Melbourne respondents were: • Sightseeing • Swimming • Visiting the Reef • Lying on the Beach • Visiting the Rainforest Six clusters of activity need to be promoted to the Melbourne market: • Opportunities to experience water-based adventures including snorkelling, diving, and white-water rafting. • Opportunities to enjoy fishing, four-wheel driving and deep-sea fishing. • Opportunity to surf. • Opportunity to relax on the beach and enjoy swimming and sunbathing. • Visiting the themeparks. • Opportunity to relax in the natural environment and partake in sightseeing, bushwalking, visiting rainforest and cruising the canals. Brisbane The Brisbane markets did differ from the Southern markets in that they were much more familiar with the destination. This was not an advantage though, as even though more knowledgeable, the knowledge did not include the elements the Coast has to offer that would have satisfied their wants. Indeed familiarity was a further problem in that "knowing a lot about the destination" was an illusionary strength, an attribute the Gold Coast delivered well but that the market did not strongly desire. So each of the segments require communications that highlight "the unknown Gold Coast ". The five top-most desired activities by the Brisbane respondents were: • Swimming • Visiting the Rainforest • Lying on the Beach • Sightseeing • Eating, Drinking & Restaurants Activities should be clustered together within communications. Perceptual clusters for the Brisbane market includes: • Opportunities to experience water-based adventures including snorkelling, diving, and white-water rafting. • Opportunities to relax and enjoy fishing, deep-sea fishing and four-wheel driving. Opportunity to surf. • Opportunity to relax on the beach and enjoy swimming and sunbathing. • Visiting the themeparks and cruising the canals. • Opportunity to relax in the natural environment and partake in sightseeing, bushwalking, and visiting rainforest


426

Project 2.2 — Infrastructure Audit Dr Jan Warnken Objectives 1. Identify and map (georeference) all currently existing accommodation businesses (hotels, motels, backpackers, caravan parks, self-contained units), theme parks, nightclubs, golf courses, tour operators, vehicle hire businesses, etc. in the Gold Coast area. 2. Characterise each business by type, age, recreation/entertainment facilities (e.g. pool, tennis court, rides, shows, bar etc) visitor capacity, address, phone, and refurbishment initiatives. 3. Compile collected data in interactive, multi-attribute MapInfo GIS layers (one layer per tourism business category). 4. Compile thematic maps of tourism opportunity spectra and maps detailing densities of types of accommodation units based on suburbs, selected areas or individual land parcels.

Research Findings • More than 400 accommodation providers were identified, mapped and interviewed. By the end of 1999, the Gold Coast offered almost any type of accommodation: from purpose built island resorts to family run eco-resorts situated in or close to National Parks, from old small hotels to brand new 35 storey condominium complexes. • More than 88% of all accommodation providers were located close to beaches along the ocean and the Broadwater. This proportion was even higher for tourist condominium complexes: only 9 out of 300 (3 %) were located away from the main coastal and Broadwater strips. • “Main Beach” and “Broadbeach” were the areas with the most intensive development activities in recent years. Other building activities of the mid to late 1990s concentrated in older areas such as Coolangatta or Southport/Labrador. • Old or outdated accommodation facilities can reduce the attractiveness of a destination against competitors with more modern infrastructure. The accumulation of older buildings can become a problem for the whole destination or at least a considerable part of it where (a) technical or economic reasons impede replacement or extensive refurbishment of these buildings and (b) many buildings of the same type and age dominate one area. Large-scale development booms are the most likely times for such accumulation of buildings. The Gold Coast had several of these booms. The most pronounced ones occurred during the early 1980’s followed by a second phase of intensive development activity in the late 1980s, early 1990s. Accommodation facilities that pose problems in regard to their replacement are high-rise condominiums. Many of them are owned by almost as many parties as there are apartments • Two areas with such critical infrastructure were identified: a relatively small one to the north and a much larger area to the south of the Surfer Paradise core.


427

• Golf has become an integral part of the tourism product, particularly for the higher end of the market. Golf facilities are therefore critical assets for a major destination. By the end of 1999, 28 golf courses were operating within the boundaries of Gold Coast City Council. They ranged from 9-hole short courses to 36-hole international golf resorts including facilities such as hotels, restaurants and fitness clubs. Most were developed between 1985 and 1994 • Most of the area’s beaches and waterways are well utilised and firmly incorporated as a central theme of the destination “Gold Coast”. These areas are probably of equal value for tourists and residents alike and used by both groups equally frequently. In 1999, supervised swimming areas were provided at 22 surf life saving clubs and another 16 stand-alone surf-life saving towers. The key issue remains with car parking spaces along swimming beaches: popular places such as Main Beach, Broadbeach or Burleigh Heads fill up very quickly on weekends. • The second issue of concern and likely conflicts between tourist operators and residents relates to increasing traffic congestion on the area’s waterways, particularly the section between the Southport-Main Beach Bridge and the seaway. This area has the highest vessel activity in south-east Queensland according to vessel counts recorded by Queensland Transport, Maritime Division. • From a tourism destination point of view the biggest issue remains with using private vehicles for transport. Both tourists and residents use the same roads and traffic congestion increases markedly on the beach sections of the Gold Coast highway during peak seasons (school holidays: January, Easter, September; “Schoolies’ week”, and the “Indy”). Current perceptions of visitors and residents in regard to existing and future traffic situations need further investigation, with particular reference to the likely effects of the new eight-lane highway between Brisbane and the Gold Coast. • Public transport for tourists was relatively well developed: most accommodation facilities were situated along the beach strip, which was also well served by the public bus transport system and coaches. • The Gold Coast hosts the greatest variety of theme and wildlife parks in Australia. For a long time, their presence had, and still has, a major impact on the image of the destination “Gold Coast”. The area’s latest major facility, “Movieworld”, was added eight years ago, but even older theme parks have been continuously updated with new rides, shows and displays • The Gold Coast provides a large number and variety of shopping facilities for domestic and international visitors. Special tourist shops were mostly contained in shopping centres within the main tourist strip, i.e. the strip along the area’s ocean beaches, or along sections of the Gold Coast Highway in Central Surfers Paradise. Most of these facilities were built during the development booms of the early and late 1980s. Although owners of tourist shops upgraded the interior and, to some extent, the façade of their shops continuously, the principle design and architecture of most shopping centres remained.


428

Project 2.3 — Visitor Satisfaction Survey Prof. Bev Sparks Objectives A survey of visitors to the Gold Coast was conducted by the Centre for Tourism and Hotel Management Research (Griffith University), in conjunction with the Cooperative Research Council for Sustainable Tourism. The project is part of the broader "Gold Coast Visioning Project', which seeks to provide research for long term sustainability of tourism on the Gold Coast. Research Findings Satisfaction data with regards to each tourism object (that is, restaurants, shopping, theme parks, accommodation and beaches). • For restaurants and cafes the most popular areas for eating out for this sample were Surfers Paradise (48%), Broadbeach (34%), and Coolangatta (15%). More than 90% of participants were somewhat satisfied to very satisfied with all dimensions concerning the Gold Coast restaurant/cafes, excepting the value dimension, whereby approximately 80% indicated a similar level of satisfaction. Ten percent indicated a level of dissatisfaction with the value dimension. • The most frequently visited shopping centres were located in Broadbeach (53%), Surfers Paradise (34%), and Southport/Labrador (20%). Approximately 90% of participants indicated they were somewhat to very satisfied with all dimensions of their shopping experience on the Gold Coast, excepting the value dimension. Again, ten percent indicated they were dissatisfied with the value for money dimension with regards to shopping. • 62% of respondents reported visiting Seaworld, 62% visited Movieworld, 42% visited Dreamworld, 36% visited Wet & Wild, and 14% visited Currumbin Bird Sanctuary. The majority of respondents were either satisfied or very satisfied with all dimensions of theme parks/wildlife excepting value for money. Approximately 20% of participants were dissatisfied with the value for money of theme parks and wildlife venues on the Gold Coast. The physical/environmental aspects as well as staff communication were the strongest area of satisfaction for theme parks. • The most frequently cited type of accommodation chosen by visitors to the Gold Coast in this sample was a high-rise apartment (31.7%), followed by low-rise apartments (17.7%) and 5-star hotels (15.3%). Approximately 12% of participants chose a 4-star hotel or timeshare properties as their accommodation. More than 65% indicated they were satisfied to very satisfied with all five dimensions regarding accommodation on the Gold Coast. Approximately five to eight percent expressed some dissatisfaction with the value, service and communication within the accommodation element. • The most frequently reported beach that was visited was Surfers Paradise (249),


429

followed by Broadbeach/Kurrawa (134), Coolangatta (128), and Main Beach (103). More than 70% indicated they were satisfied to very satisfied with all five dimensions with the beaches on the Gold Coast. • Approximately 40% of the variance in overall satisfaction with the Gold Coast as a tourist destination was explained by overall satisfaction with the five tourism objects. In particular, the objects that made a significant contribution to respondents' overall satisfaction in order of importance were accommodation, restaurants, beaches and shopping. Participation rates and satisfaction with a range of activities visitors may have engaged in during their stay. • Participation and satisfaction with a range of activities or services was assessed. Results indicated high levels of participation in a range of activities including swimming (n=694), getting a suntan (n=550), meeting local people (n=531) and sampling local food/wine (n=511). The service receiving the highest rate of extreme satisfaction was limousine services, with 65% of respondents participating in this service reporting they were very satisfied.. • Respondents indicated that one of the most memorable aspects of their holiday was related to visiting a theme park, followed by the overall Gold Coast lifestyle, then the beach experience. Participants were also asked to record things they would like to see changed on the Gold Coast that would improve their satisfaction with their holiday. A change in accommodation was the most frequent response from participants, followed by changes to roads and transport on the Gold Coast. • For each tourism object, respondents were asked to indicate their overall satisfaction with each object, as well as how important each object was to them as a component of their entire holiday. For all objects except accommodation, the level of satisfaction experienced by participants exceeded the level of importance they placed on the object. Are respondents are likely to return to the Gold Coast and/or recommend the Gold Coast as a tourist destination to others? • One-third of participants expressed they were very likely to return to the Gold Coast for a holiday within the next 12 months, followed by 17 % who suggested it was likely they would return. By comparison, approximately one third chose somewhat unlikely to very unlikely with regards to the likelihood of return within the next 12 months. Eight percent of participants remained neutral on the subject. • The majority of participants indicated they were either likely or very likely to recommend the Gold Coast as a holiday destination to other potential visitors (75%), with a very strong response (43%) suggesting they are very likely to recommend the Gold Coast. Fourteen percent indicated they were somewhat likely to make a recommendation. Less than four percent suggested they were somewhat to very unlikely to recommend the Gold Coast as a tourist destination, whilst eight percent remained neutral on the subject.


430

• The majority of participants (59%) suggested that their opinion of the Gold Coast as a holiday destination remained unchanged compared to when they first arrived for their holiday. Approximately 35% indicated a positive improvement in their opinion, in contrast to approximately seven percent who suggested a deterioration in opinion • The questionnaire also asked whether promotional material (advertising) seen prior to a visit to the Gold Coast actually matched the visitors' experience of the Gold Coast. Of the 615 respondents who reported seeing materials, 47% felt it matched up, 42% felt it somewhat matched up, and I 1 % felt it did not match up.


431

Project 2.4 — Natural Assets Audit Dr Jan Warnken Objectives This study assesses visitor activities and their resulting impacts on natural assets at popular sites in the Gold Coast Hinterland. The magnitude of impacts associated with human recreational activities is a function of usage levels, the type of activity, length of recovery period, cumulative effects of other (natural) disturbances, mitigation measures, and resilience of natural ecosystems. Research Findings • Almost all popular Hinterland sites rely on hard measures (stabilised surfaces for walks, parking areas, toilets, solid waste management systems) to cope with current levels of use. • Major impacts (e.g. Lantana invasion in parts of Springbrook NP) are likely to be the result of land use practices in the past and perhaps tourism, but not tourism alone. Impacts will occur where issues are not addressed (bird feeding) or where facilities cannot cope with increasing demand (e.g. composting toilets). • The majority of travellers to sites in the Hinterland are independent (either local residents or visitors using rental cars or their own vehicles). • In general, data sets for visitor usage at individual sites are poor or non-existent. Accordingly, the ratio of independent tourists versus local residents visiting these sites is practically unknown. • Overall, increases in visitor numbers are almost inevitable with increases in the area's population — irrespective of any tourism advertisement. People new to the area (residents or independent tourists staying on the Gold Coast) are likely to target existing, i.e. well known sites. • In light of increasing pressures as a result of population and tourism growth the concept of entrance fees needs to be explored. Introducing entrance fees to a selected number of parks could encourage visitors to use less frequented sites, generate feedback about visitor numbers, and could also provide economic incentives for owners of private land to offer recreational experiences that are currently not permissible in similar environments on land controlled by state or local governments. • Developing further tracks and trailheads to take pressure off existing sites will lead to further displacement of species sensitive to low levels of human disturbance and, therefore, further habitat segmentation in otherwise intact natural systems. • Developing more man-made attractions at existing sites in order to concentrate human activities in areas that have already been substantially altered often requires major capital investment for upgrading relevant access roads.


432

• Most sites with a recreational opportunity spectrum similar to existing nodes are located above sections of steep and inaccessible terrain. For this very reason, upgrades will be expensive but equally important: traffic congestion and a greater risk of accidents along narrow and windy roads could deter many Australian drivers and tour operators who are often not used to such traffic conditions or cannot afford long delays. • Whatever the preferred solution for managing the mounting pressure on visitor sites will be, it will always require a centralised and integrated planning and management approach that involves local governments (GCCC, Beaudesert and Tweed Shire), state governments, tour operators and local communities.


433

Project 3.1 — Economic Impacts Study Dr Guy West Objectives Fundamental questions always relate to the economic and employment impacts of current, and future tourism. For example, tourism has ‘downstream effects’ on the Gold Coast economy. Visitor consumption has a direct impact on all the industries supplying the goods and services and an indirect impact on other industries supplying those industries and so on. This research study was designed to provide the Gold Coast with a contemporary model to address that question. As new data becomes available from official Commonwealth and State sources, this report can be updated to assess shifts and underlying patterns in the tourism economy of the Gold Coast. Research Findings Gross Output. • In 1996-7, visitors to the Gold Coast were responsible for contributing $2.9 billion to gross production. (Table 3). • This reflects the total (direct and flow-on) impact of visitor expenditure on the Gold Coast on gross production. Of this amount, • $0.3 billion (11.%1) came from Queensland residents, • $1.5 billion (50.3%) from interstate visitors, and • $1.1 billion (38.6%) from international tourists. • The Accommodation, cafes and restaurants sector is the largest beneficiary with $490 million (increased) production. Other significant beneficiaries are Retail trade with $387 million, Property services with $383 million, Recreation and entertainment services with $275 million, and Food manufacturing with $215 million. Gross Regional Product • Gross production or output is a misleading indicator of economic performance due to double counting. A more reliable indicator is the contribution to gross regional product. Tourism contributed over $1.2 billion to the Gold Coast's gross regional product in 1996-7, (Table 4) of which: o $134 million (11.1%) originated from (non-Gold Coast) Queensland residents, o $608 million (50.3%) from interstate visitors and o $447 million (38.6%) from international visitors. • Again, the Accommodation, cafes and restaurants sector is the largest contributor with $202 million. Retail trade contributes $193 million, Property services $164 million, and Recreation and entertainment services $130 million. Household Income


434

• Tourism activity on the Gold Coast in 1996/97 is associated with income, by way of payment in wages and salaries to employees working on the Gold Coast, of $662.7 million.. • The most significant sectors were Retail trade with income to employees of $146 million, Accommodation, cafes and restaurants with $134 million and Recreation and entertainment with $80 million. Employment: • Tourism

activity can be linked, directly and indirectly, to approximately 25,057 thousand FTE (full-time equivalent) jobs on the Gold Coast in 1996-7. Retail trade and Accommodation, cafes and restaurants employ 6,130 and 5,350 FTE persons respectively, with Recreation and entertainment services employing 2,708.


Project 3.2 Gold Coast Tourism Activity Analysis Dr. Dave Weaver Project absorbed into Project 3.4

435


436

Project 3.3 — Social Impacts Study Dr Liz Fredline Objectives • To assess the impacts of tourism on the lifestyle and quality of life of Gold Coast residents, as revealed by the perceptions of this population; and • To identify resident’s views of the future of tourism and, in particular, on the forms of tourism development that are most compatible with their lifestyle aspirations. Research Findings • 9.6% of residents reported a negative overall impact of tourism • 47.3% felt that it had some level of positive impact, • 43% suggested that overall, tourism had no effect on their quality of life. • At a personal level traffic congestion was seen as the most substantial negative impact, with 88.8% of residents reporting that it had increased, and on average, this had a slight to moderately negative impact on personal quality of life. • Traffic congestion was seen as having a more substantial impact on the community as a whole rating. • At the community level, illegal drug use was seen as the most serious negative impact of tourism, rating. • Other negative impacts which were considered important included crime and alcohol related behavioural problems. • 88% reported that tourism had improved local dining opportunities. • Other positive impacts that were considered to be important included the increased standard of maintenance of public facilities, more shopping, entertainment and recreation opportunities, more opportunities for business, and improved strength of the local economy. • 3.3% of residents indicated preferences for fewer tourists in the future. • 28.5% suggested that the Gold Coast should aim to maintain the current level of visitation. • 68.3% said that the Gold Coast should try to attract more tourists. • Five subgroups were identified based on a cluster analysis of the perceptions of personal impact. The groups can be summarised as: 1. Negative group – a small proportion (8%) of residents who felt that, on balance, the impacts of tourism were detrimental to their quality of life, although many of them still felt it was positive for the community as a whole. 2. Ambivalent group – about 25% of the sample who see both positive and negative impacts of tourism, although on balance, they appear to perceive that the positives slightly outweigh the negatives. 3. Unconcerned group – almost one third of the respondents appeared largely unconcerned by tourism suggesting that any impacts had little affect on their personal quality of life. This group tended not to work in tourism, lived away from tourism zones, and did not really come into contact with tourists.


437

4. Moderately positive group – about 24% who perceive almost all the impacts of tourism to be positive. 5. Highly positive group – another small group of about 10% who rate many of the impacts to be highly positive. Ironically, they also rate some impacts more negatively than the moderately positive group, but overall, they are clearly the most positive group. • Unconcerned residents were less likely to work in tourism and more likely to rate the tourism activity in their suburb as being non-existent. • Those in the highly positive group were more likely to rate tourism activity in their suburb as above average or very high. • Highly positive residents are more likely to have frequent contact with tourists as part of their jobs, and at tourist facilities and attractions. • Negative group members tend to feel less attached to the community and feel that the costs and benefits of tourism are not fairly distributed. • Negative group members are more likely to want fewer tourists to visit the Gold Coast in the future, while ambivalent residents want about the same number and positive residents want increased visitors. • Ambivalent residents tend to support a continuation of tourism development in the hinterland and along the coastal strip, but with management measures to control visitor numbers and the places where development can take place.


438

Project 3.4 — Attitudes And Behaviour Of Visitors At Selected Sites In The Gold Coast Hinterland

Dr Dave Weaver & Dr Laura Lawton Objectives This study profiles recreational/tourism visitors to the Gold Coast hinterland in order to inform the planning and management of a sustainable tourism product for the region. Research Findings • From a tourism destination point of view the biggest issue remains with using private vehicles for transport. Both tourists and residents use the same roads and traffic congestion increases markedly on the beach sections of the Gold Coast highway during peak seasons (school holidays: January, Easter, September; “Schoolies’ week”, and the “Indy”). Current perceptions of visitors and residents in regard to existing and future traffic situations need further investigation, with particular reference to the likely effects of the new eight-lane highway between Brisbane and the Gold Coast. Overnight visits by Australians accounted for 80 per cent of visitation to the Gold Coast in 1999, with approximately 3.5 million domestic visits made to the region resulting in an estimated 15.7 million visitor nights. • Growth in domestic tourism has been strong for the region (1998-99) in terms of both visits (10.8 per cent per annum) and visitor nights (8.9 per cent per annum). The Gold Coast’s growth rates have far surpassed those experienced by Australia as a whole. • Shift-share analysis reveals that the Gold Coast performed particularly well between 1998 and 1999 in attracting visitor nights from the ACT, New South Wales and Queensland markets. • The Victorian market was an area of concern for the region, with declining rates of visitation experienced. While an overall decline in domestic travel by Victorians was reported for Australia as a whole, the Gold Coast’s drop in visitor nights was more substantial than the national levels. • The Gold Coast exhibited strong growth from 1998 to 1999 in domestic visitation for holiday/leisure purposes (23.4 per cent) although this purpose of visit segment declined in Australia as a whole (-1.8 per cent) • Life-cycle segments which exhibited strong growth in terms of visitation to the Gold Coast were the ‘Young singles living alone or in shared accommodation’, ‘Parents with youngest child aged 15 + still living at home’, ‘Older, working, married persons’ and ‘ Young-mid life couples with no children’. • The most popular activities participated in by domestic visitors to the Gold Coast included going to the beach, eating out in restaurants, shopping, visiting friends and relatives and sightseeing. • 45.9% of the day-only visitors spent between three and five hours at the site, which was usually accessed by a private car accommodating a group of from two to six persons. • 12% of the respondents were visiting with young children. About three-quarters of


439

the sample used toilet facilities at the site while short trails were also heavily utilised. • Visitors to all of the sites were highly satisfied with their site experiences (94% satisfied or very satisfied), with the walking trails cited most frequently as the area of greatest satisfaction. • Facilities, the peaceful setting, views and wildlife were also cited frequently. Facilities were also cited most frequently as the area of least satisfaction, followed by the trails (e.g., need upgrading, difficult to follow) and the access roads. • Over 85% of the sample indicated an intent to return to the site, while most of the remainder were overseas or interstate visitors who thought it unlikely that they would return to southeast Queensland. • For 80% of the respondents, the site where the survey was obtained was the primary destination of that particular hinterland trip, and for 50% it was the only destination visited. Tamborine Mountain was the most popular additional destination, while the towns of Canungra and Beechmont emerged as important gateway visitation foci. • On average, almost $100 was spent on the overall hinterland trip, with Gallery Walk revealing the highest expenditures ($149) and Purlingbrook Falls the lowest ($46). As with the site experience, the level of satisfaction with the transit experience was also high (due primarily to the scenery and views), though a substantial amount of dissatisfaction with the access roads at Binna Burra and O’Reilly’s was also discerned. • 33.3% of the respondents were in the hinterland as part of a larger trip to the Gold Coast, and 49.4% of these tourists were staying in Gold Coast tourist accommodation. As with additional trip destinations, Tamborine Mountain was the most frequently visited hinterland destination in the 12-month period prior to the surveyed site visit. It was also the most preferred site, due to the variety of available attractions and its proximity to the Gold Coast. O’Reilly’s was the destination that a plurality of respondents wanted to visit but were unable to do so.


440

APPENDIX F Tourism Synergies Associated with Key Industry Strategies Identified in the GCCC Economic Strategy

Table F.1 Tourism Synergies Associated with Key Industry Strategies Identified in the GCCC Economic Strategy.∝ Key industry strategy

Tourism synergies

Communication and information

Lifestyle implications of tourism’s enhancement of leisure opportunities has the potential to play a role in decisions relating to the location of IT firms/entrepreneurs.

Education and training

Educational tourism: educational services attract international students who, with visiting family members, also become tourists. Lifestyle factors in student choice: the attractiveness of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination also makes this region an attractive place to live while studying. Alumni networks: former international students become ambassadors for Gold Coast tourism and the Gold Coast generally upon their return home. Tourism management and planning research capabilities of the CRC and Griffith University are elements of the ‘knowledge industry’ development Adoption of “Green Globe” as a framework for benchmarking tourism related environmental management on the Gold Coast, along with the identification of this concept with the CRC for Sustainable Tourism, provides an opportunity for the Gold Coast to promote both its environmental management technical capabilities abroad and its environmental tourism destination assets. A stringent environmental management regime is essential for protecting environmental assets that are central to the region’s sustainability as a tourist destination.

Environmental

Film and interactive media

Film and interactive media applications to entertainment technology underpin the continual renewal of theme parks such as Movieworld Reinforcement of leisure theme, which is central to the Gold coast’s image as a tourist destination

Food, beverage and aquaculture

Restaurants and fine food are essential elements of the range of services that make the Gold Coast an attractive destination. There are potential synergies between the marketing of the Gold Coast as a tourist destination and the marketing of its food products.


441

Table F.1 (cont.)

Tourism Synergies Associated with Key Industry Strategies Identified in the Draft

Economic Strategy.∝

Key industry strategy

Tourism synergies

Health and medical

There are tourism sector spin-offs from the provision of medical services to international markets (families accompanying patients and patients themselves during recuperation may engage in tourist activities). For the reasons alluded to in the previous point the Gold Coast’s attractiveness as a tourist destination can give its medical providers a competitive edge in international markets.

Marine

The marine environment constitutes a major tourism asset in the area and potential synergies exist between the marketing of pleasure craft manufactured in the area and the recreational boating opportunities available to tourists. The proposed cruise shipping terminal would provide access to an additional tourism marketing.

Urban development

Urban development capabilities will support the enhancement of existing tourism infrastructure and the construction of new quality infrastructure, such as resorts, mariners , etc.

∝

(Gold Coast City Council, 2001a)


442

APPENDIX G Items requiring responses by participants in the 2020 Visioning Workshop 1. Do you think that Gold Coast tourism is thriving, just making do, or in long term decline? Please state the reasons for your conclusions. 2. If you think the prospects for Gold Coast tourism are less than rosy, do you think the current industry has the capabilities and mindsets to create a rosy future again? Why do you think so? 3. If we continue with business as usual with only incremental and marginal changes, describe what you think will be the situation in the year 2011. 4. What do you think is the destiny of the Gold Coast? What is it good at (aptitude) and love doing (passionate about)? SESSION TWO 5. In one sentence describe the essential essence of Gold Coast tourism circa 2020. 6. Describe the scene in more detail, especially noting significant changes since 2001. 7. Name a quality, facility or opportunity which has been added to the Gold Coast make this difference. 8. Describe how the Gold Coast tourism facilitates tourists to appreciate and celebrate nature. 9. Describe how Gold Coast tourism facilitates tourists to appreciate and celebrate culture 10. Describe how Gold Coast tourism facilitates tourists to find and create their own wellbeing.


443

APPENDIX H List of Acronyms ABS

Australian Bureau of Statistics

ASTEC

Australian Science and Technology Council

BTR

Bureau of Tourism Research

CRC

Cooperative Research Centre

CRCST

Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism

CSIRO

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DEST

Department of Education, Science and Training

DETYA

Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs

DISR

Department of Industry, Science and Resources

DIST

Department of Industry, Science and Tourism

DITR

Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources

GCCC

Gold Coast City Council

GCTB

Gold Coast Tourism Bureau

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PMSEC

Prime Minister's Science and Engineering Council

PMSEIC

Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council

QTTC

Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation

SET

Science Engineering and Technology

SME

Small to Medium Size Enterprises

TQ

Tourism Queensland

WCED

Western Centre for Environmental Decisionmaking

WTTC

World Tourism and Travel Corporation