Within the broad umbrella of science, knowledge management has proven to be a unique field for its ability to be self-reflective. In this blog, I will be focusing on what knowledge management literature has to say about science itself and the processes of knowledge creation and transfer within the scientific enterprise.
Collins (1974) begins with a criticism of previous sociologists who have studied scientific groups, remarking that their definitions of social groups are based too much on the explicit transfer of knowledge between group members. Collins contrasts by arguing that groups can be distinguished through the different tacit knowledge they possess. The author studies several research labs that were involved in the creation of a “TEA” laser and investigates the network and knowledge links between them. He finds one case in which a lab built a laser exactly to another lab’s specifications, yet the laser didn’t work. This example illustrates the nature of tacit knowledge – the explicit instructions were not enough to lead to a successful laser. The author also finds several impediments to knowledge transfer when knowledge is created – academic literature that is more focused on who is doing what than providing guidance on laser building, lack of understanding between collaborating labs, lack of cooperation between labs due to competition, and a lack of previous interactional history to build upon. These examples illustrate that even when new knowledge is created, it is difficult for this knowledge to be transferred elsewhere without a robust network in place. As Stephen Antczak noted in his first blog post, “in a different context, such as one member of a group being embedded in one of the successful groups, the knowledge transfer might have had a better chance at success”.
Another point Stephen made in that blog post is that tacit knowledge may be seen as less valuable than explicit knowledge. This certainly seems to be the case in the public health program planning literature, according to Kothari et al. (2012). They note that much of the public health program planning guidelines are based exclusively on explicit knowledge, which neglects the crucial role that tacit knowledge plays in these planning decisions. The authors used semi-structured interviews and focus groups of public health program staff in Ontario, Canada in order to understand how tacit knowledge is used in making planning decisions. They find that while participants rarely directly mentioned the role of tacit knowledge in the planning process, tacit concepts arose naturally within the interviews. Tacit knowledge is important in discovering planning opportunities, bringing together the planning team, securing funding and commitment from key partners, and tailoring the program to a target group so that it is engaging to them. The tacit dimensions to these tasks often were based on previous experience and knowing what was needed to move the program forward. These results indicate the importance of tacit knowledge in the public health field, which the authors argue deserves greater recognition.
Liu & Lee (2013) take a completely different approach to understanding the interplay between knowledge management and science, instead looking at how concept-map knowledge management systems can aid in the learning and motivation of biology students. A concept-map knowledge management system is essentially a teaching structure that allows students to create concept maps based on topics and words selected by instructors. The students are able to access instructions and guidance from the instructor to help build the concept map, are able to upload their concept map to a database that allows the instructor to track their progress, and are able to attend a forum with other students to discuss ideas. The authors find that this type of knowledge structure led to greater learning and satisfaction among students compared to typical lecture-based learning. This was especially the case when learning was cooperative compared to individual.
I find the way these authors defined and used knowledge management to be interesting. They define it as “the capacity of the system to demonstrate the same knowledge in multiple versions”. This seems somewhat reductive, as if the authors were not totally familiar with the broader knowledge management literature. However, their study does have implications for this literature, especially within knowledge creation. The idea of using concept maps and designing systems to support concept map creation seems to be an effective way for students to create new knowledge for themselves. As Emily Collier stated in her blog post, concept maps “allowed students to formulate and organize their tacit knowledge and make connections that are informed or enlightened by other students and the teacher”. This also has implications for knowledge transfer, especially for transfer between instructors and students. In one of Will Silberman’s early blog posts, he noted that “mapping out concepts were effective at minimizing the awkwardness associated with mistranslation”. Given the success of these concept map systems in this study, I hope that these results actually lead to meaningful pedagogical changes.
These three articles, while applied to very different contexts, demonstrate the importance of tacit knowledge within science. This may seem surprising given the highly regimented and explicit basis of most scientific research. However, science is as much art as anything else, with many researchers and students of science working from previous experience to gather new insights. The implication is that science should be more inclusive of tacit knowledge based approaches to learning, creation, and implementation of scientific knowledge.
References:
Antczak, S. (2018, January 14). Tacit knowledge & competitive advantage. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://stephenantczak.wordpress.com/2018/01/14/first-blog-post/
Collier, E. (2018, March 14). Practical learning with Duguid & Brown, Liu & Lee, and Ziori & Diennes. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://ebcollier.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/practical-learning-with-duguid-brown-liu-lee-and-ziori-diennes/
Collins, H. M. (1974). The TEA set: Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies, 4, 165-185. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/284473
Kothari, A., Rudman, D., Dobbins, M., Rouse, M., Sibbald, S., & Edwards, N. (2012). The use of tacit and explicit knowledge in public health: A qualitative study. Implementation Science, 7. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-20
Liu, S-H., & Lee, G-G. (2013). Using a concept map knowledge management system to enhance the learning of biology. Computers & Education, 68, 105-116. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.007
Silberman, W. (2018, February 27). On being anxious and uncertain: A case for codification. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://willsilberman.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/on-being-anxious-and-uncertain-a-case-for-codification/
LIS 658: Knowledge Management 
@stephenantczak left a comment somewhere about his junky car that his girlfriend got fixed. A lot of tacit knowledge in that comment. During my research and reading for the paper, I came across an article by Markus about knowledge reuse. Designing repositories for knowledge reuse results in design-time schema selection which affects subsequent knowledge recall actions. The context of the information to be recalled, if available at the time of the repository design, could inform the design but then you’d need to predict what people were going to do with the information before you built the repository.
Sigh. This is starting to sound like a Trekkie kind of day.
LikeLike
Your summary of Liu & Lee’s work on the concept-map knowledge management system is very thought provoking. The idea that students are able to access instructions/guidance via the instructor to help them build their concept map, the ability to upload their concept maps to a database that allows their instructor to track their progress, and then the forum they attend with other students to discuss ideas is a very interesting concept. You mentioned that they found that this type of knowledge structure ultimately led to a greater learning and satisfaction among students when compared with a typical lecture-based learning structure…especially in cooperative/group settings? I’m going to have to read this article for myself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your summary of Collins was very clear and concise. Great job! I wanted to jump in here and bring up practical knowledge since it has popped up in a few other comment threads and seems very applicable here. Polanyi brought it up, and a several of the articles, including Collins touch on it, whether or not they explicitly say “practical knowledge” or “practice”. (Obviously the Community of Practice articles like Brown and Duguid (1991). Part of the failure to transfer knowledge successfully, particularly in Science, is the practical knowledge that is missing. The little tidbits of knowledge experience creates, and the context it provides, cannot be replicated in a manual for building a laser. What are your thoughts on practical knowledge? Do you think there would ever be a way to make practical knowledge explicit? I’m seeing Harry Potter and his potions book from the Half Blood Prince here. (If you like Harry Potter.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think it would be very difficult, because practical knowledge is by nature tacit. But I don’t think transferring this knowledge is impossible. Collins mentioned some of the difficulties in knowledge transfer (e.g. a competitive environment), and I wonder if this practical knowledge could be transferred without those impediments. So do I think that practical knowledge can be made explicit? Probably not. But that doesn’t mean we can’t do anything with it. There are practical ways to spread practical knowledge.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You brought up competitive environment and I think that is important as well. Going back to the Harry Potter example. Harry seems to pick up some of this practical knowledge with the guide of the Half Blood Prince’s notes in his potions book. However, for competitive reasons, Harry doesn’t share this knowledge with the class, not even really with his friends. It gives him an advantage that puts him in the potions masters special “Slug Club”. So even when their is a bit of practical knowledge that can be shared explicitly, it may not go very far for the competitive reason other impediment you point out.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Your evaluations of all the readings are really helpful, but what I found the most compelling was a quote in your final paragraph: “However, science is as much art as anything else, with many researchers and students of science working from previous experience to gather new insights.” While I think that our ability to codify tacit knowledge in the future is vital for moving scientific endeavors forward, I have also come to realize that organizations absolutely need organic transferring of tacit knowledge. We will never be able to remove humanity from this equation. Relationships and stories will always be necessary to guide the laser.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I did not have a chance to read the article, but the importance of tacit knowledge within the field of public health seems like a natural fit and I am glad to know that there is research to support what seems to be a fairly logical assumption. The role of tacit knowledge in building a shared store of knowledge that will inform future action seems especially relevant to a field that deals with public policy and programming. It would seem that this intensely personal form of knowledge would provide invaluable insights into the needs of a specific community as well as creating the shared context with which to engage that community.
LikeLiked by 1 person