The transfer of tacit knowledge from those who have it
to those who need it is often seen as the Holy Grail of
knowledge management. Yet the literature on tacit
knowledge gives mixed messages about the feasibility of,
or techniques for, transferring tacit knowledge, and it
is difficult to evaluate the strengths of the competing
claims. Part of the problem is that there are several
debates in the knowledge management community that
affect authors’ underlying assumptions about tacit
knowledge, but authors of papers often fail to make
clear their position on these various debates. This is
ironic, given the topic being discussed.
This paper is intended to make clear the key underlying
assumptions in the literature that are relevant to
capture and sharing of tacit knowledge. Four such
assumptions are discussed: whether tacit knowledge
includes all knowledge that is not explicit; whether
tacit knowledge is unrecordable or simply unrecorded;
whether knowledge can be owned by groups as well as
individuals; and whether the capture of partial
knowledge is a necessary step in knowledge sharing, or a
waste of effort because the subjectivity of the
knowledge structures in an expert’s head means that, if
knowledge can be captured at all, it must be captured in
its entirety or vital context is lost.
