Knowledge Conversion and Nonaka’s SECI framework

This section will examine the SECI framework for knowledge creation (Nonaka, 1994) and its possible application to an online discussion setting in which knowledge about essay writing is created through feedback among members and mediated by the forum and member participation.

The spiraling SECI framework (socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization) is based on a cycle in which knowledge is converted from tacit to explicit and back into tacit. Nonaka (1994) proposed the framework as a model of how Japanese companies encouraged innovation by providing contexts for people to share experiences, make tacit knowledge explicit, combine new and existing

knowledge, and reapply it in an ongoing spiral.

This model of knowledge creation contrasts with the more rigid hierarchical problem- solving or “input-process-output” approaches of some Western companies (Nonaka, 1994, p. 14): in Nonaka’s view an organization had to innovate, create knowledge and change in relation to its environment (and change its environment in the process), rather than merely process information or solve problems.

In 1998, Nonaka and Konno added the concept of ba, translated from Japanese as ‘space’ but also including time. Ba, described by Proudfit (2009) as sounding somewhat ‘mystical’ to Western ears, provides the energy, quality and place for movement in the knowledge spiral, and is subdivided corresponding to the four knowledge-conversion modes.

The SECI model has not been applied frequently to educational settings, perhaps reflecting traditional assumptions of much school learning as being transmissive and unidirectional, i.e., directed or facilitated by the teacher, and associated with

particular scripted roles for learners and teachers rather than with the creation of new knowledge in the institution.

2.6.1 Explicit and Tacit Knowledge

Explicit knowledge, based by Nonaka (1994) on Michael Polanyi’s categorization (1966), is defined as formal or systematic knowledge such as data, specifications, or manuals which can be transmitted and stored relatively easily. Knowledge that can be spoken or captured in drawing and writing is explicit, and can be applied in different contexts. Knowledge related to the senses, movement, intuition, unarticulated mental

models, or rules of thumb is tacit, rooted in action, procedures, routines, commitment, ideals, values, and emotions.

Nonaka’s framework suggests four modes of knowledge conversion (Figure 3). Socialization represents the sharing of tacit knowledge through the experiences of individuals. Externalization occurs when tacit knowledge becomes articulated into explicit knowledge through dialogue and imagery. Combination occurs when different forms of explicit knowledge are connected to create more complex or systematic sets of knowledge, and internalization represents the process of

embodying explicit into tacit knowledge and applying it in the real world (Nonaka, Toyama, & Konno, 2000).

Figure 3: Nonaka’s SECI framework

(Adapted from Martin-Niemi & Greatbanks, 2010; Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka et al., 2000)

Socialization: Tacit to Tacit

In Nonaka’s description, socialization involves capturing knowledge through physical proximity or direct interaction with stakeholders, suppliers, and customers, or even by walking around a company or shopfloor. By empathizing and sharing experiences with others (not just with peers), a space for trust and sharing develops (Nonaka & Konno, 1998) in which tacit knowledge is acquired.

In the socialization mode, originating ba allows individuals to share feelings,

emotions, experiences, and mental models. “Care, love, trust, and commitment” are characteristics of socialization (Nonaka et al., 2000, p. 15).

Externalization: Tacit to Explicit

In externalization, tacit knowledge is translated into forms comprehensible by others. As the individual commits to the group, ideas and images become expressed through dialogue as words, concepts, metaphors and analogies, and visuals, forming a

common language. Dialogue, listening, and contributing are necessary, and a mix of people with people with different abilities is important.

Interacting ba acts on externalization and is more “consciously constructed” (Nonaka & Konno, 1998, p. 47), involving the juxtaposition of people with a mix of knowledge in teams.

Combination: Explicit to Explicit

The combination mode converts explicit knowledge into more complex sets of explicit knowledge and diffuses it among members. Explicit forms of knowledge are

combined, edited, or processed into other explicit forms such as reports or data through online networks, databases, and collaborative environments.

The energy or space in the combination mode is called systemizing ba or cyber ba. Nonaka and Konno (1998, p. 46) suggested that Cartesian logic dominates – “I think, therefore I am” – as opposed to the “I love, therefore I am” in socialization.

Internalization: Explicit to Tacit

In internalization, explicit knowledge changes back into tacit knowledge and becomes embodied in action and practice. Nonaka (1994) proposed that this change resembles the traditional notion of “learning,” although as an active rather than a merely

reflective process. Through training, practice, refinement, experiment, and learning- by-doing, the individual becomes aware of the larger setting and acquires a richer understanding. Exercising ba supports learning-by-doing and continuous self- refinement in real life and exercises.

2.6.2 Critiques and Applications of the SECI framework

Among questions arising from Nonaka’s SECI model are the nature of knowledge conversion and queries over starting points and direction.

Nonaka does not specify a starting point in the SECI quadrant, but suggests that “a continual dialogue” between explicit and tacit knowledge drives the creation of new ideas and concepts (Nonaka, 1994, p. 15), with the spiral continuing upwards. Gourlay (2006), Bratianu (2010), and Hara and Hew (2007), among others,

expressed dissatisfaction with Nonaka’s interpretation of Polanyi’s tacit and explicit forms of knowledge and the mechanisms for the conversion of tacit into explicit knowledge and vice versa. Hara and Hew noted that knowledge “exists along a continuum of tacitness and explicitness” (2007, p. 238), with a subsequent review by Nonaka and von Krogh (2009) stressing such a continuum.

Describing Nonaka’s framework as an excellent metaphor, Bratianu (2010) cautioned that it does not contribute to practical analysis. The work has also been criticized for being too focused on Japanese business contexts, and by Gourlay (2006) and

Engeström (1999) for the lack of recognition of the controlling role of managers in defining goals and activities.

In applications of the framework to educational settings, Chatti et al. (2007)

proposed a categorization of web tools and technologies in each quadrant. Hosseini outlined a step-by-step approach which “controls the sequence” in virtual learning, noting that socialization is often ignored in learning situations despite being “the most significant stage” in knowledge creation (2011, p. 270). In an application of the framework to learning in blogging communities, Martin-Niemi and Greatbanks (2010) noted the need to include virtual environments in both the socialization and externalization modes.

Bryceson (2007), in an implementation with Master’s level courses in Australia, proposed a significantly different modification. The five-stage ESCIE adaptation (Figure 4) of Nonaka’s framework began with online learners encountering course content, termed “explicitization” by Bryceson as “the lecturer’s externalization of his/her knowledge of the course subject matter” (2007, p. 203). This was followed by simultaneous socialization and combination phases as members worked in the forums and gathered and combined information. Following the combination phase, internalization took place, and finally externalization occurred in work reports and final assignments.

Bryceson’s use of the term externalization departs significantly from Nonaka’s usage, which defined the mode as the change from tacit to explicit and the articulation of ideas and images. The modification bypasses the vital role of externalization in

allowing people to articulate their understandings and develop shared understanding.

Figure 4: Bryceson’s ESCIE model

Haag and Duan (2012) chose to omit the socialization mode, arguing that the in- dwelling and physical proximity required by Nonaka’s socialization mode was not possible online. However, noting that externalization and combination both involved elements of socialization, they argued for more examination of the role of

socialization in online learning.

From the limited applications of the SECI framework to online and informal educational settings, it becomes clear that questions arise with its unmodified transition from traditional organizations to online settings, particularly for its socialization mode.