 |
Professor Gabriele Lakomski
BA (Hons), DipEd (Münster, Germany), MEd (Sydney), PhD (Illinois, USA)
Centre for Organizational Learning and Leadership
Phone: 61 +3 8344 8217
Fax: 61 +3 9349 4198
Email: lakomski@unimelb.edu.au
Location: rm 440, Alice Hoy Building |
Research interests
Professor Gabriele Lakomski is best known for her critical work on the presumptions of leadership and organizational learning in both public and private sector organizations. Trained in philosophy of science and epistemology, her research is based on the most recent scientific understanding of human knowledge acquisition and the processing of information, developed by connectionist cognitive science. In her work she examines how such empirical knowledge affects current theories of organizational learning, leadership, organizational culture and change, as well as the training of managers and administrators. Her research program includes the analysis of Knowledge Management (KM) as a new tool for managing organizational development and change with particular emphasis on what knowledge is, and on the human ability to codify and represent knowledge. She argues that organizational knowledge comprises both the knowledge that can be represented by modern technologies and the knowledge that cannot, such as people’s experience and their know-how. For KM to be successful it must incorporate an understanding of the intangible knowledge people share daily in their routine encounters in organizational contexts.
Some of these research activities have grown out of a substantive research program conducted with Professor Colin W. Evers of the University of Hong Kong.
This research program, known as naturalistic coherentism, can be described as a systematic attempt to develop a new conceptual framework for dealing with the central themes of educational administration. Three features of work in progress—now written up in three books—have been covered: (1) the nature of administrative theory; (2) an account of administrative practice; (3) consequences of the first two features for theorizing and doing educational administration.
 |
Lakomski, G. Managing Without Leadership Towards a Theory of Organizational Functioning. This book argues that theories of leadership do not account for organizational practice. Organizational life is messy and complex and those in positions of leadership, no matter how exceptional, are neither omniscient nor infallible. Rather than continue the study of leaders and leadership it is more productive to develop a causal, ground-up, account of organizational functioning that replaces top–down theories of leadership. Such a naturalistic account includes leaders as part and parcel of the cognitive fabric of organizational life in which they are always embedded. |
 |
Evers, C.W. And Lakomski, G. Doing Educational Administration: Coherentist Naturalism into Administrative Practice was also published by Pergamon/Elsevier and appeared in May 2000. The book attempts to work out in more detail a view of administrative practice by extending the epistemology of earlier work to cover practical knowledge. It provides some examples of administrative practice such as natural decision-making, ethical practice, administrator training, and leadership. |
 |
Keeves, J.P. and Lakomski, G (eds.) Issues in Educational Research. This text, published by Pergamon/Elsevier, Oxford, in 1999 presents up to date information and critical debates across a variety of methodological issues and should be of particular interest to researchers and graduate students in the social sciences. |
 |
Evers, C.W. And Lakomski, G. Exploring Educational Administration: Coherentist Applications and Critical Debates, Pergamon Press, Oxford, appeared in December 1996. This book contains some second thoughts on our theory of theories, some attempts to show its significance for developing an account of educational administration, and some first thoughts on a theory of practice. |
 |
Evers, C.W. and Lakomski, G. Knowing Educational Administration, was published in 1991 by Pergamon Press, Oxford. This book deals mainly with administrative theory and how it is influenced by theories of knowledge. |
|
|
Shorter overviews of our research agendaEvers, C.W. And Lakomski, G. (1993) ‘Justifying educational administration’, Educational Management and Administration, 21(3), 140-152. This paper summarizes the main theses of the first book. It is a ‘target article’ and so is followed by a series of replies from assorted scholars who are united in thinking that the book’s ideas are mistaken in various ways.
Evers, C.W. And Lakomski, G. (1996) ‘Science in educational administration: a postpositivist conception’, Education Administration Quarterly, 32(4), 379-402. This paper summarizes key ideas that were being developed for the second book, including how to apply a broadened notion of science that includes ethics and human subjectivity, to educational administration. Some of the other papers in this issue of the journal try to do the same thing in different ways while, as usual, others think the enterprise is mistaken.
Evers, C.W. And Lakomski, G. (2001) 'Knowledge of administrative practice: a naturalistic view', Journal of Educational Administration, 39(5), 2001. This piece is the lead article of a special Issue of the Journal of Educational Administration, edited by both of us. It summarizes the ideas of book three and is currently still being written. The other contributions in this issue respond to our views, and if previous experience is any guide, they will also take issue with what many believe are our (misguided) ideas.
Academic teaching
- 481-803 M.Ed. Creating the Learning Organisation
- 482-712 D. Ed. Doctoral Thesis Research Seminar
- 482-638 M.Ed. Organisation and Culture
- 482-860 MKM, Principles of Knowledge Management
- 482-861 MKM, Creating Knowledge Cultures
- 482-707 MEd, MEM, Leadership
|
top of page
