If we accept that the
knowledge will be transferred at either explicit or tacit level, then the
following four types of exchange might be considered in the
diagram:
Diffusion at this level is
something we all do, everyday, without any real thought or question. When we
write a letter, prepare a report, or enter data on a database, we are sharing
our explicit knowledge with other people. Look at anyone’s diary and you will
see ample examples of the diffusion process at this level. Look again in the
diary and you will find examples of tacit diffusion, but it will probably be
marginal activities, such as social engagements, evening meetings in the wine
bar, or a reminder to meet someone
for coffee.
The primary purpose goal in
diffusing explicit knowledge is to systemize concepts into shared schemata. It
achieves this through a process of incorporation and separation. As your
information flows with others, it will be synthesised, modified and generally
played with until it takes on a new and original form. Think about the
construction of a management report. Although one person might have written the
document, it will generally be grounded in a stream of debate that has taken
place over the preceding weeks and months. So the end explicit product is
actually the product of an explicit diffusion process that occurred prior to the
event.
This is also the primary
process by which companies often communicate corporate messages within an
organisation. The company newsletter, chairman’s web site, or the mugs
promoting new company vision are all example of the explicit to explicit process
of diffusion. Although explicit communication clearly has it strengths (for
example telling someone that a ladder is about to fall on their head) but, when
the message needs to have a sense of passion and feeling, then the explicit
process does have its limitations. One of the ways that companies are starting
to overcome this is through the use of web broadcasts to promote company
messages. As company intranet bandwidths increase so will the capacity to use
web-cams and video broadcasts to promote some of the softer communications
aspects. Although not quite to a tacit level, the use of interactive tools and
emotional images can help to ease the explanation process.
Although this form of diffusion
can be commonly seen, the problem is that behind every piece of codified
information will be the tacit knowledge of the original creator. Only by
appreciating the tacit intent of the creator will you be able to realise the
intended value. The danger is to assumption that the message you read will be
the same as the message someone writes. For example, as I write these words now,
trying to get them onto the page can be quite torturous, as I struggle to make
sense of the tacit ideas and emotions that drive their construction, Even as I
write I don’t really know what will come out next. Wrapped around these words
is a blanket of tacit thoughts and feelings, ones that unfortunately you are
unable to see. As such, as you read them you will be filtering, critiquing and
judging the words, rather than truly understanding what I mean. We all see the
worlds through our perceptual filters and in the majority of cases we find it
difficult to know what those filters are, let alone describe how they corrupt
any information we acquire.
Another problem with the explicit
to explicit diffusion is the ease with which is can be communicated. The
introduction of e-mail and the cc button has probably caused more time
management problems for people than all the other business issues put together.
It seems that we often go crazy with the power to be able to copy the world in
on our latest note. Whereas- pre e-mail, we would have had to walk to the
photocopy machine, put the paper in an envelop and then post a whole wadge of
envelopes, now that one button can flood the company in seconds with spurious
and occasionally irritating messages. As such we are now in the era of
information overload. Barely a train journey goes by where I don’t hear people
bemoaning (or bragging) about how much e-mail they received overnight.
The end result of all this data
rush is that the discovery stage becomes clogged up, primarily with data that
has little relevance to their personal value proposition. As a result, we often
spend more and more time in the explicit diffusion activities, all of which
contributes to the fact that less time is spent on those tacit transfer
activities that can add real personal value.
This is how our explicit
knowledge is taken and internalised by another person or group of people. For
example this embedding process is often seen in the indoctrination courses used
by large consulting firms. The goal is to take the company methodology and
attempt to embed it into the new recruits deep tacit systems. So the new
employees have all entered with their different disciplinary backgrounds and the
course director’s role is to mould the group to a point where they will think,
feel and behave in a way that underpins and reinforces the company ethos and
methodology.
In many cases you might embed
capability in others through the use of stories and analogies. For example Xerox
is effective at repairing copiers, not primarily because it has good manuals and
good training courses. It is effective mainly because it has a group of repair
people of varying degrees of mastery who constantly share with each other in
ways that promote learning, development and effective work in the field. They
use "walkie talkies" to get instant help and to share their "war
stories" with each other so that what is developed is a corporate or
community knowledge, beyond what any individual could master. IBM discovered
that the best sales training was to put beginners in their early months on the
job physically next to a respected master so that they could learn by
observation and intuition as well as by explicit teaching from those people.[i]
This is
possibly one of the harder elements in the diffusion framework. The idea is to
take something that I hold at a deep and intuitive level and share it with other
at the explicit level. This is often a process by which I start to expose by
deep beliefs about a subject; the skills that I use to get a particular sound
from the bass guitar; or the emotions that I have about a certain person or
subject. The end goal is to move the knowledge into a concept that can be
understood and replicated by others.
However
the first problem is that the very fact that it is tacit means that I will
struggle to make it explicit to myself before making it clears to others. Now it
might be that through a process of inner induction and deduction I might be able
to describe the fact that I hold the guitar in a certain way; bend the string a
minute fraction and then use my fingers in a certain way to provide a rich bass
sound – but even then there is a chance that I am doing things that I don’t
understand and cannot explain. This will lead to unexplainable gaps between the
tacit action and the codified explicit model.
However
there are ways that the tacit factors can be exposed and diffused. One of the
first ways is through the use of storyboards. Rather than trying to talk through
how you manage a process, try drawing a series of rich pictures that add up to a
sequential map of the action. The way you build the picture, the items you
include and the subtle nuances of the design might well help you and others to
delve deeper into the tacit knowledge. Another technique can be the use of
stories or metaphors. Rather than trying to describe how you manage a team of
engineers, liken it to the way you repair a fault on the car or decorate the
house. Through the pictorial pictures and analogies, it might be possible to
expose deeper aspects of your management style. Lastly, don’t try to expose
what you do – asks someone else to describe what they observe. It might be
that we are unable to personally deconstruct the tacit element – by through a
process of feedback and debate, it might possible to understand yourself though
the eyes of another person.
Finally,
one of the most common ways that this process can be seen in organisations,
homes or down the local bar is through the use of war stores. As people describe
how they dealt with a difficult situation the are gently eliciting some of the
deeper decision making processes and strategies they se to manage problems. By
carefully listening to what people say, how they say it and the outcomes of the
situation, it is possible to quickly elicit someone tacit capabilities and
possibly reconstruct and apply them in a different situation.
The tacit
to tacit diffusion process is probably one of the most common but least managed
processes. From early childhood we all use this framework as a way in which to
gather new knowledge to survive in a complex world. At school we might absorb
some of the teachers explicit knowledge, but deep down we are being conditioned
(positively or negatively) by their personal views and values.
From there
we move into the apprentice stage of our life. This might be mastering the
complexities of university life under the wing of a pastoral tutor. It might be
part of the apprentice model where someone will spend between two and five years
with a series of people who are recognised as masters in their discipline. This
leads into the later years of our education, even to the point where the PhD
student sits under the wing of the supervisor, or a director mentors the manager
as they aspire to climb the corporate ladder.
The whole
experience stage of this model is based upon the precept that knowledge
transference can take place by association and being close to an individual
rather than receiving coded signals that we choose to internalise and adopt. The
experience process is driven by a number of simple precepts:
 |
That the receiver will absorb the other
persons experiences and knowledge through a process of observation, imitation
and practice. The apprentice engineer might first watch the technician wire up a
complex network, then try the process until the watchful eye of the tutor and
then finally be given sufficient personal space to try the action on his own. |
|
It is inherently context driven, in that
when receiving information from another person, the transfer will be influenced
by the setting and can in many cases heavily modify the absorption process. For
example, the tacit knowledge a junior doctor receives from the senior consultant
will be heavily dependent upon the ethical standard and operating procedures
used in the hospital. |
|
Even though the knowledge diffusion
process might be work focused, this doesn’t mean that it must occur in a work
setting. The Friday night beer bust or social activities that drive an
organisation will offer greater opportunities to transfer tacit knowledge than
those formal events that are stage managed by the organisation. It is in this
situation that we can build personal models about the rules of thumbs and subtle
guidelines that drive an industry. |
One area
where the experience style of diffusion can be seen is in the legal industry.
Consider the role of the law and the way that knowledge is transferred within
the profession. Although the content of the law is highly codified and explicit
in nature, the interpretation and management of the law as a process is a highly
tacit and intuitive process. Although, there are courses at law school on trial
advocacy, legal research and legal reasoning, these courses often fall short
because there is no single agreement as to the best way to analyse a problem or
develop a legal argument. As a result the transference of practical legal
knowledge relies upon the ad-hoc nature of experience to guide junior members of
the profession in the development of their expertise and competence as legal
practitioners. This is because knowledge of the law is only a small part of the
legal process. Legal reasoning is dependent on the ability to define, develop
and deliver legal arguments that apply a favourable legal principle to a new and
often diverse set of principles. As such, there is little precedent and a large
degree of the diffusion and sharing process is based upon peer review and
feedback.]
(c) Mick Cope