Tacit knowledge

Citation

Chase, R.L. (2007), "Tacit knowledge", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 11 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm.2007.23011aaa.001

Tacit knowledge

Tacit knowledge

The theme running through this issue of the Journal of Knowledge Management is tacit knowledge. After years of research, discussion and reflection, there is still considerable debate about the nature of tacit knowledge and whether it can really be managed within an organizational context. This issue directly and indirectly examines new ways to look at tacit knowledge.

Richard C. Hicks, Ronald Dattero and Stuart D. Galup tackle the issue of tacit knowledge by means of the “Explicit Islands in a Tacit Sea” (EITS) metaphor. The sea signifies that tacit knowledge surrounds data, information, and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is needed to create, execute, and maintain data, information, and explicit knowledge. The shore is where tacit and explicit knowledge meet. The practical implications of this metaphor are its flexibility and transparency of the transitional actions that affect the evolution of data to knowledge.

Bertolt Meyer and Kozo Sugiyama attempt to sharpen the concepts of tacit, implicit and explicit knowledge by linking them to findings from cognitive psychology and memory science. They propose a one-dimensional model that enables psychometric access to part of non-explicit knowledge through a structural assessment technique. Since this approach can quantify the increase in individual knowledge, it can be used in the quantitative evaluation of KM projects.

According to Peter Holdt Christensen, knowledge sharing is more than the closing of performance gaps and the sharing of stocks of knowledge. He argues that knowledge sharing is also about bridging situations of organizational interdependencies, thereby supporting ongoing enterprise activities. The author identifies four types of knowledge that are pivotal to share: professional knowledge, coordinating knowledge, object-based knowledge and know-who. Christensen states that the practice of facilitating knowledge sharing must necessarily focus on different “channels” to enable the sharing process. The practical implications therefore require not only attention to best practices, but also to knowledge bridging organizational interdependencies.

Andreas Riege states that for knowledge sharing initiatives to be effective, they need to be introduced by senior and middle managers who not only understand and support the strategic and operational need to align business and KM strategy, but also recognize the human, organizational and technological challenges associated with the newly introduced actions. His paper specifically examines knowledge transfer barriers within multi-national corporations (MNCs). The author proposes a number of actions to overcome these barriers. This action list can act as a starter or reassurance kit for managerial decision making when introducing, maintaining or seeking to improve internal knowledge transfer practices.

The paper by Ursula Mulder and Alma Whiteley describes the development of a database to act as a trigger for the emergence and application of tacit knowledge within a bounded environment. The bounded environment consists of the corporate business drivers that express valued organizational goals. The process of designing, developing and populating fields within the database is qualitative, process-oriented and above all interactive. Results support the idea that under bounded conditions when there is a shared sense of purpose and an iterative process where ownership is possible, tacit knowledge can be captured. In the bounded environment tacit knowledge is found to be not haphazard, confirming its “end purpose” for being.

Eliezer Geisler’s paper develops a typology of the roles of people and organizations in their transaction in knowledge. Based on structural interviews with managers in three large manufacturing companies, a model is proposed which describes the processing of knowledge in organizations. Four stages are identified: generation, transfer, implementation and absorption. Similarly, three types of transactors in knowledge are also identified: generators, transformers and users. The findings from the interviews reveal that there are different motives that animate the various transactors in knowledge and the distinct behavioral roles that these transactors assume in their organizations.

Andre Saito, Katsuhiro Umemoto and Mitsuru Ikeda have developed an ontology to distinguish and describe knowledge management technologies according to their support of an organization’s strategy. The resulting framework suggests that KM technologies can be analyzed better in the context of KM initiatives, instead of the usual approach associating them with knowledge processes. The authors conclude that KM initiatives provide the background and contextual elements necessary to explain technology adoption and use.

The paper by Chaminda P. Pathirage, Dilanthi G. Amaratunga and Richard P. Haigh discusses the importance and relevance of tacit knowledge in the construction industry. The authors comment on the importance of tacit knowledge with regards to organizational performance, and highlight how the construction industry can gain competitive advantage through a thorough understanding and management of individual tacit knowledge.

The final two papers in this issue focus on knowledge management in the aerospace industry, especially managing tacit knowledge found in the sector’s highly-trained workforce. Mostafa Jafari, Mehdi N. Fesharaki and Peyman Akhavan investigate the role of knowledge management in this high-tech industry, and provide a general framework for knowledge management applied in Iran Aerospace Industries Organization (AIO). This study opens up new lines of research and highlights implications for knowledge management efforts, including change management programs through KM tools.

Lim Wai Tat and Stewart Hase have studied how KM practices can affect the Malaysian aerospace industry. Based on interviews and secondary public data, the authors propose a KM implementation framework consisting of four stages: awareness cultivation, objectives definition, strategy adoption, and action implementation. According to the authors, each of these stages involves a number of key elements for successful KM implementation.

Rory L. Chase</b