Knowledge Management: Articulation Challenges
Knowledge Management: Articulation Challenges
Knowledge Management: Articulation Challenges
CULTURAL CHALLENGES
Sharing not part of corporate culture
Insecurity/Lack of trust
Lack of absorptive capacity
In addition to above challenges, there are various difficulties which are there
and can be described as follows:
These difficulties can mainly be related to language & perception but
also to time, value, and distance.
The challenge with language lie in the fact that intangible tacit
knowledge is held in a non-verbal form. For most people
articulating/expressing something natural and obvious could be
hard and challenging. More experience and deeper knowledge
directs to higher tacitness of knowledge and that leads to greater
difficulties in articulating the knowledge.
PAGE 1
taken place but tacit knowledge has been shared. In this case
socialization is more significant than the externalization.
PAGE 2
‘converted’ into explicit knowledge. In this regard, Knowledge Management
offers a number of perspectives, which provide complementary and at times
competing insights.
However, the most influential perspective in this field is Nonaka and
Takeuchi’ knowledge conversion theory.
It offers a dynamic view of knowledge based on the main assumption that
tacit and explicit knowledge can convert into each other. As part of this
theory, the SECI model is developed with its four stages of knowledge
conversion:
PAGE 3
According to this model:
PAGE 4
This model explains how knowledge can be managed in a rather neat and
orderly fashion, which may appear oversimplified. To explain their model of
knowledge conversion further, they mentioned that knowledge is created in
the spiral that goes through two seemingly antithetical concepts, such as
order and chaos, micro and macro (individual and environment), part and
whole, mind and body, tacit and explicit, self and other, deduction and
induction, creating and control (Nonaka et al, 2000: 43). This statement
acknowledges that knowledge has a complex nature that includes antithetical
concepts, which can be transcended and synthesized through dialectical
thinking offered with their model. Therefore, if one understands the model
not as a single spiral, but as a multitude of spirals at micro and macro level,
the model offers some interesting opportunities.
PAGE 5