Is Tacit Knowledge Really Tacit? pp307-318
The aim of this article is to increase understanding of tacit knowledge as a phenomenon and also, to specify and understand tacit knowledge of an expert in a given context. In the discourse of organizational behavior, the use of the concept of tacit knowledge and empirical scientific research on it has become more popular only in the 1990s. The strong increase in expert work and knowledge‑intensive fields make examining the topic timely and both theoretically and practically interesting. The most significant theoretical contribution of the study is the increase in understanding, as well as, the creation of new knowledge of the contents and the nature of tacit knowledge. Based on our study, it seems that the current division of knowledge to explicit and tacit is not sufficient to describe the phenomenon. It has been proposed that explicit knowledge is visible and “articulated” knowledge that can easily be transferred and codified, e.g., through speech, documents and various information management systems. Implicit knowledge, on the other hand, is “silent”, hidden and non‑verbal knowledge that is difficult or even impossible to transfer and express verbally. We propose that tacit knowledge comprises different components, some of which can be articulated and made explicit. Examples of such are individual’s or organizations accustomed lines of action that are based on explicit instructions. On the other hand, individual‑specific tacit knowledge that includes feelings, emotions and intuition, individual’s intuitive behaviour or personal relationships, can be considered as “the genuine tacit knowledge” in the sense that it cannot be made visible or transferred. These findings suggest that the interconnectedness of explicit and tacit knowledge ought to be examined further.
Keywords: tacit knowledge, nature of tacit knowledge, components of tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge, organizational culture, case study
Knowledge workers represent more than half of all employees in advanced economies. In general knowledge workers are people who, when working, use their brain more than their muscles. Agricultural and industrial worlds depended on the work of manual workers and the life standard of their inhabitants and the success of agricultural and industrial organizations grew due to the increase of manual worker productivity. Existing knowledge economy depends on the work of knowledge workers and the labour productivity they can achieve. Knowledge is a major resource and tool that knowledge workers use to create values. Therefore, the way work with knowledge is organized in an organization influences the productivity of knowledge workers. This article discusses the results of research on knowledge management in organizations in the Czech Republic. This research started at the University of Economics, Prague in 2004 and continues today.
The purpose of this paper is to present a critical analysis of the well known knowledge dynamics model elaborated by Ikujiro Nonaka and his co‑workers. The essence of this model consists of three layers of the knowledge‑creation process: (a) the process o
Keywords: explicit knowledge, knowledge conversion, knowledge creation, knowledge dynamics, tacit knowledge
Volume 8 Issue 3 / Nov 2010 pp267‑344
Keywords: action research, case study, codification and personalization knowledge management strategies, collaborative projects, components of tacit knowledge, critical knowledge factors, design re-use, engineering design, ethnographic study, evidence-based medical practice., explicit and tacit knowledge forms, explicit knowledge, fixture and tooling, knowledge assets management, knowledge based systems, knowledge capital, knowledge integration, knowledge map, nature of tacit knowledge, new product development, organizational culture, performance improvement, research centre, social capital, tacit knowledge,