Types and taxonomies of knowledge

As knowledge is considered a result of an individual’s mind-process and can be varied from context to context, a variety of concepts were introduced to taxonomise knowledge. In the field of knowledge management, understanding of the distinction between the different types of knowledge is fundamentally crucial for theoretical developments (Alavi and Leidner, 2001).

Among various perspectives on the taxonomies of knowledge, Ryle’s work (1949) significantly contributes the idea of differentiating between "knowing how" and "knowing th at’. In his perception, "knowing how" is intelligence that can be exhibited only in an

activity through action or performance, whereas "knowing that" is certain knowledge

possessed in a person’s mind. Polanyi (1967) further develops Ryle’s aspects o f knowing by suggesting that tacit knowledge engages in the activity as part of "knowing how" for

doing that activity, but it is difficult to articulate in words {"knowing that" or explicit knowledge). Consequently, tacit knowledge, e.g. skills, experiences or good practices, is

knowledge being known by an individual or some parts of an organisation. It is, therefore, difficult to share or communicate to the rest of the organisation. Particularly, it can be learned through context, experience or practice, and requires extensive personal contact and trust for effective transfer. On the other hand, explicit knowledge is a form of

knowledge that can be accessed, acquired or transferred easily. It can be found in the form of an organisation’s documents: manuals, reports, articles, minutes or pictures. Polanyi also contended that these two aspects of knowing should be presented as a continuum rather than as distinct entities, implying a range of tacitness between tacit and explicit knowledge.

In addition, Lundvall and Johnson (1994) introduced four categories of knowledge by stressing the distinction between "information-like knowledge" and "complex knowledge"’.

• Know-what: knowledge about facts that can be easily digested and codified into bits

of data;

• Know-why: knowledge about laws and principles of nature, as well as the human

Chapter 2 - K now ledge m anagement an d innovation

• Know-how. skills, the ability to achieve an assigned task successfully; and

• Know-who: the ability to identify a person who knows ‘what’ and ‘how’ to do with any specific subject, also involving the social ability to deal with different kinds of people and experts.

In other perspectives, by centring on organisational management, Blaekler (1995) classified knowledge into five categories : emhrained, embodied, encultured, embedded and

encoded. As the key characteristic can be imparted through its meaningful name, each type

of knowledge refers to specific organisational knowledge as follows:

• encoded knowledge: recorded knowledge in signs, symbols and/or natural

languages, such as manuals, code of practice (CoP) and reports;

• embedded knowledge: knowledge that resides in practices, routines and procedures; • embrained knowledge: abstract knowledge generally dependent on conceptual and

cognitive skills;

• encultured knowledge: socially constructed knowledge that relates to acculturation

and socialisation activities; and

• embodied knowledge: action-oriented knowledge dependent on context whieh is

likely to require sentient information and physical postures.

Additionally, based on a broad range of classifications in the past, Blumentritt and Johnston (1999) proposed a framework of four broad classes, in which the order of the classes represented in the framework also reflects the relative degree of difficulty of knowledge transfer. The four classes are:

• codified knowledge: knowledge having been made explicit and readily transferable, such information comprising all kinds of facts and figures;

• common knowledge: knowledge that is aeeepted as standard without being made

formally codified, such as routines or practiees;

• social knowledge: knowledge of social links and shared values, sueh as cultural

issues and interpersonal relationships; and

• embodied knowledge: knowledge that is rooted in experience, background and skill

of a person.

Chapter 2 - K now ledge m anagement an d innovation

The taxonomy that appears to be well known and accepted by many scholars is the dichotomy between tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Tiwana, 2002). A clearer picture of the relationship between all types of knowledge mentioned above is illustrated in Figure 2.2. The continuum of explicit-tacit knowledge is used to present levels of difficulty of knowledge transfer. Knowledge with formal and explicit form is shown on the left, whereas abstract and conceptual knowledge is on the right. As can be seen, knowledge residing in routines or eultural systems or requiring social interaction is considered to be aligned in the middle, because even though it has not been made formally explicit, it can be more easily transferred than tacit knowledge.

Figure 2.2: Taxonomies of knowledge

R yle ( 1 9 4 9 ) k n ow ing-w hat

Polanyi ( 1 9 6 7 ) I explicit knowledge ■ tacitness

Lundvall and k n o w -w h at

Johnson ( 1 9 9 4 ) know -w hy

Blaekler ( 1 9 9 5 ) e n c o d e d know ledge

B lu m en tritt and codified

Johnston (1 9 9 9 ) k n ow ledge e m b e d d e d kn o w led g e e m b ra in e d k n o w led g e c om m on know ledge kn o w -w h o e n cu ltu re d know ledge social k now ledge k now ing-how t a c it k n o w le d g e | k n o w -h o w e m b o d ie d kn o w led g e e m b o d ie d k n o w led g e

Source: Adapted from Blumentritt and Johnston (1999)

Explicit versus tacit knowledge

Explicit knowledge is defined as a eomponent of knowledge that is articulated and presented in a symbolic form or formal language, such as numbers and words (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Saint-Onge, 1996; Alavi and Leidner, 2001). Explicit knowledge can be communicated and transmitted easily between individuals in various forms, sueh as spoken words, written reports, manuals, books and the like. Through a readily transferable form, it can be reused in a eonsistent and repeatable manner. Moreover, it is what can easily be transformed into information and data which then are captured, stored and processed through information technology (Nissen, 2002).

Chapter 2 - K now ledge m anagement and innovation

On the other hand, taeit knowledge is a component of knowledge that is hard to articulate and difficult to communicate with others. Tacit knowledge resides in people’s mind, beliefs and behaviours; it is a result of personal experiences (Saint-Onge, 1996). It is deeply affected by the context of the possessors of the knowledge (Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Tiwana, 2002). "We can know more that we can teW is how Polanyi (1967) further explained taeit knowledge. Snowden (1999) added that tacit knowledge is something that is simply known, possibly without the ability to explain. There are two dimensions of tacit knowledge: technical and cognitive (Nonaka et a l, 2000). The technical dimension, often referred to as ‘know-how’, encompasses informal personal skills, crafts and insights in a specific context, whereas the cognitive dimension refers to personal mental models consisting of beliefs, values paradigms and viewpoints which are deeply ingrained in people’s minds and shape the way they perceive the world. Consequently, tacit knowledge is highly personal and not easily expressible; it is difficult to codify, formalise, express and communicate. However, it can be shared and developed through people's actions and interactions. Polanyi (1967) argued that taeit knowledge is obtained and retained through experienee. When people perform a task repeatedly in a similar way, tacit knowledge is embodied in their mind and practice; or when a task is tried out or performed in a new way, new tacit knowledge is generated and learned. Table 2.2 compares the distinct characteristics of explicit and tacit knowledge.

Table 2.2: Comparison between explieit and taeit knowledge

E xplicit k n o w le d g e T a cit k n o w le d g e Similar term s articulated, codified, encoded form al

knowledge

implicit, embodied, informal, personalised knowledge N atural form s articulated in sym bolic form or form al

language

resides in human mind, behaviour and perception

Presenting form s documents, manuals, specifications, scientific form ulae and the like

experiences, actions, ideas, skills and practices

Mode o f transfer processed and shared in the form o f data developed and shared through human interaction

Key strengths • reusable in a consistent and repeatable manner

• captured, stored and transm itted easily through information technology

• rarer and possessing m ore valuable than its counterpart

• inimitable and non-substitutable

Chapter 2 - K now ledge management an d innovation

In an organisational context, both explicit and tacit knowledge permeate daily life and contribute to the fulfilment of organisational goals. Explicit knowledge may be stored as a written proeedure, minutes of a meeting or a chain of e-mail correspondence, and then used to support a decision-making process. Conversely, tacit knowledge is skills, experience and expertise residing in employees’ minds. While explieit knowledge can be purchased, stolen, or re-invented, tacit knowledge cannot be easily shared. Lee (2002) argued that tacit knowledge plays an essential role in organisations as a lot of organisational knowledge exists in that form. Since any organisational aetivity requires human aetions to carry it out, explicit knowledge needs to be internalised (made tacit) to employees’ minds before it can be used. However, explicit and tacit knowledge should not be considered separately as they are complementary and form a spectrum (Polanyi, 1967; Snowden, 1999). Explicit knowledge without taeit insight is likely to lose its sense quickly. Nonaka et a l (2000) added that new knowledge is created through interactions between tacit and explicit knowledge, rather than from tacit or explicit knowledge alone; this is further discussed in the next section.