The IISES International Interdisciplinary Conference April 2012

Palermo, Italy

Comes, Goes or Stays? Possibility to retain tacit knowledge in organizations

Prof. dr. Andrea Bencsik Szchenyi Istvn University Gyr, Hungary Univerzita J. Selyeho Komarno Slovakia Address: 9026. Gyr Egyetem tr 1. Hungary e-mail: bencsik.andrea @yahoo.com Andrea Slyom PhD student Szchenyi Istvn University Gyr, Hungary Address: 9026. Gyr Egyetem tr 1. Hungary e-mail: solyoma @sze.hu Dra G. Kocsis architect Audi Hungaria Kft Gyr Hungary e-mail: gkdori@yahoo.com

Abstract

The necessity to build a knowledge management system often comes up as a prerequisite to operate an organization successfully. A lot of scientific studies, papers deal with the possibilities of its realization but sometimes a narrow-minded way of thinking limits the successful process of creation and operation.

The questions are if IT and other technical tool solutions are able to retain organizational knowledge, how tacit knowledge can be retained, developed and shared in different ways. This paper investigates these questions and gives an alternative solution. Key words: knowledge, knowledge management, knowledge sharing, tacit knowledge

Introduction

According to new trends of modern business and manager schools the causes of organizational success can be found in the human factor. It is the most valuable resource. It is able to develop an organization consciously, able to build in such values at organizations which help a creative and innovative way of thinking and continuous changing of organizations. Nowadays a new dimension of thinking about knowledge has become more important. This new dimension puts retaining of knowledge to the centre of thinking. Researchers of knowledge management deal with a question how organisations can acquire knowledge which can ensure competitiveness for them. In addition newer generations examine tools with which they can retain knowledge at companies. It serves a defence against knowledge drain. Knowledge appears as a factor of production in the scientific literature, among others in Wilkes (0998) and Sieberts (2007) writings. Companies depend on immaterial resources increasingly and this is why they invest a lot into these resources in every sector. In this paper we will show you an examination of knowledge transfer, especially a part of knowledge which is known as implicit or tacit knowledge. Importance of this knowledge part has become significant together with demographic changes of companies. Problems to manage tacit knowledge concern every company in developed countries. The value rise of tacit knowledge and attention which accompanies it started from the USA at the beginning of the 1990 when employees born in the age of baby boom started to retire. This problem does not belong to the American society only but its existence is a problem to be dealt with in Hungary as well. After the political transformation, in the year of 1990, introduction of market economy led to the formation of the entrepreneur layer. These entrepreneurs will retire in the next few years when they make their connections and their enterprises over to their descendants. The most important aim in case of these entrepreneurs to keep these key persons or retired leaders knowledge inside the companies in order to support organizational operation. Problems can originate not from retired leaders or employees only. A lot of young people can spend some years abroad (especially at subsidiary companies of multinational companies) and this knowledge losing can cause a lot of problems.

These leaving from companies can be planned in advance (for months, years) by companies but most companies do not find these processes and knowledge loss important. Companies do not calculate cost growth which originates from knowledge loss. This paper has a double aim. On the one hand to introduce a new approach which does not consider the only way to share knowledge to make the tacit explicit. To transform tacit knowledge into explicit is not a prerequisite to fix knowledge in organizational memory. Although it is needed that suitable persons in suitable time with suitable tools should fix knowledge into organizational memory. On the other hand we will show a model which is developed by ourselves. This model summarizes each side of knowledge sharing and in this model the most often used knowledge sharing tools are set.

1. Background of research

During the investigation of scientific literature we realized that experts who deal with knowledge management do not pay enough attention to a very important factor - the time factor - in the course of their knowledge sharing surveys. In this chapter classical theories and models will be summarized and on the basis of this summary a model will be shown which is completed with time dimension. This model is a basis of a diagnostic empirical survey and it is very important to handle problems which appear during of tacit knowledge sharing processes. On the basis of often used and from scientific literature well - known definitions ((Broadbent, 1998), (Streatfiled & Wilson, 1999), (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995), (Tomka, 2009), (Reinmann & Rothmeier, 2001) etc.) we formed an own definition in which time factor is dominant. According to the definition we use knowledge management as a tool - system which is available and gives an assistance to leaders: to recognize knowledge as a resource, to identify its necessity, to form their systems that way that where human resource is in the centre and tools of information and communication technologies have a supporting role.

The aim is that knowledge management should not be a state but a process. This process starts professionally and before the employee as a resource acquirement is systematized. The end of this process is not the employees leaving but the organization of new employees entrance. This is a periodic cycle process. The biggest challenge in this process is that beyond explicit knowledge (which can be documented) tacit knowledge (which cannot be documented) should be retained in organizations memory. To form this definition is important because our hypothesis can be reinforced with it. According to this hypothesis there are different ways of researches of tacit knowledge sharing rather than wandering in the spiral of making explicit knowledge to tacit knowledge.

North (1998) has a classical knowledge model called knowledge stairs. Competence was missing from it but a bit later he completed the model with it. It is very important because this way North made it clear how a sign, data, information and knowledge can be distinguished. When competence appeared in the model, it became visible that competence is not a part of knowledge, it should be handled in a different way. To limit and share explicit knowledge is not enough. We have to focus on competence as well because it cannot be separated from human resources, they are in a very tight connection with each other. If we complete the classical knowledge stairs by competence, operative and strategic management and represent technique organization human resource in one model, it will form a most completed model of knowledge management elements, process and participants. It shows that human resource starts at that point where technique ends and technique can be used in case of structured information. On the basis of the above mentioned model it is unambiguous that the technique is the same as structuring data and information and knowledge management moves on among employees. (Figure 1.) This complex model is completed with time factor which origins from the view of the above formed definition. It is an important factor of a process idea which is a prerequisite to retain tacit knowledge. (Figure 2.)

Source: own construction

Figure 1. Knowledge Stairs + Organization Technique Human Resource Model + Knowledge Management

Source: own construction

Figure 2. Knowledge Stairs + Organization Technique Human Resource Model + Knowledge Management + Time Factor

In this context time factor means that a company has data, signs in the past dimension and these are invested in meaning by the members of organizations. It is reckoned as a birthplace of tacit knowledge. As signs and data are explicit, they can be documented. We have to base our thoughts on these facts during the process of tacit knowledge sharing. Later it has to be adapted to the above mentioned model and at the bottom of the pyramid (if the model is mapped, it will be a pyramid) these factors have to be documented and prepared for the sharing process.

The next stages show a dimension of the present which relates to the date of knowledge transmission taking possession process if we survey knowledge sharing processes as a function of time. (This viewpoint will be clear when the above mentioned model will be detailed in Chapter 3.) This third dimension contains every element which is a part of knowledge taking possession retaining processes. It has real significance because the soft facts of taking possession processes become a part of the knowledge management system. On the way from knowledge to competence each element will appear which can mean a pledge of successful knowledge taking possession retaining processes. The future dimension shows ability to innovate and to infiltrate organizational knowledge which means competitiveness on the knowledge stairs.

2. Model

During the development of this model a primary viewpoint was to summarize the different elements of tacit knowledge sharing process in a homogeneous system. To make visible participants of tacit knowledge sharing process, time dimensions, organizational characteristics and elements of classical knowledge management was another important aim as well. They are the building stones of knowledge management. The model presents that there is not an order of importance among the elements but connections can be formed at a system level. This model is a three dimension pyramid. Its base is tacit knowledge and its four sides are: time dimensions of knowledge sharing (past, present, future) participants of knowledge sharing (leader, leaving employee, employee who takes work over)

organizational characteristics which are in knowledge sharing (motivation, preparing, procedure of knowledge transfer, tools of knowledge transfer, soft elements, innovation) building stones of knowledge from the view of tacit knowledge, (identification, preparing, documentation, transfer, sharing, using, fastening in organizational memory, development)

When a colleague leaves an organization, knowledge transfer process has to be seen from three time dimensions. In the past preparations must be made to transfer knowledge in the most effective way. During this process the new colleague will get hold of new knowledge which has to be managed in the future together with the knowledge which he/she has had originally. While constructing the model the triple unit of individual, organization and knowledge were investigated and subordinated to time intervals. If the model is examined in three dimensions, it can be seen exactly which persons with what kind of organizational characters will do with tacit knowledge in an interval. It will come to light as well what will be missing or what will be operating in a bad way. To use the pyramid from the view of individuals, (second side of the pyramid) participants of knowledge transfer have to be joined with time intervals according to their taking an active part in any period. The other members of organizations do not appear in this model but they have an important role because the knowledge transfer process must not be analysed deprived from it environment. In the past, before the real period of knowledge transfer (which is a relatively long one) the colleague who leaves the workplace and participants of knowledge transfer process are human factors. At different companies it was investigated that before a colleagues leaving how much earlier the knowledge transfer process has to be started.

In the present, at the moment of transfer, a new colleague will appear as a new player in the organization who takes over the leaving colleagues tasks. In the future orientation the leaving employee is not an active member of processes at companies at all. The third side of the pyramid contains organizational characters, divided according to time dimensions. In the past dimension organizational culture has to be mentioned. It can be investigated how this culture supports knowledge sharing, especially tacit knowledge sharing, how it handles organizational changes, how organizational strategy contains principles of knowledge sharing. The other element is motivation which means on the one hand how the imparter is motivated. But on the other hand it means the leaders motivation i n supporting the process of knowledge transfer. In the present dimension examination of transfer process and tools of transfer are dominating. In this case there is a powerful role of the classical (individual organization technique) triple model. The main question of future dimension is the influence of changes on innovation and sustainable development. Namely, if innovative advantages or disadvantages originate from the addition of acquired tacit knowledge and the own possessed knowledge or not. Also it is an important question if addition happens at all or not. The fourth side of the pyramid focuses on knowledge. At the dividing of this side Probst (1998) style building stones of knowledge management were the base. According to these divisions the past is about knowledge representation (Munich model (2001)). Namely, in this phase knowledge identifying, knowledge documentation, knowledge preparation for transfer proceed. The present, the real transfer (according to the Munich model the phase of knowledge communication) is about knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer. The future is divided into three components from the view of knowledge spreading: using the newly acquired knowledge, knowledge retaining, (it means knowledge retaining which was a part of organizational culture in the past), knowledge development (how the newly acquired knowledge and possessed knowledge can be mixed and developed by the new colleague).

When the sides of pyramid meet, the question can be answered how a leader supports or motivates this process. To ensure operating of this pyramid it is indispensable to use the most suitable possibilities from the suitable resource. In the following part some knowledge instruments will be shown (without the completeness of demands) and will be put in the model. As the fourth side of the pyramid is based on Probst style knowledge management building stones, knowledge management instruments are joined with them. These elements on the basis of the original model contain explicit and implicit knowledge management instruments as well. Although here only tacit knowledge management instruments are put into the model.

3. Knowledge sharing instruments

3.1. Probst style model and its knowledge sharing instruments

Probsts model handles knowledge management as a process. The external circle consists of knowledge purposes, mensuration of knowledge and feedback about the connection between these two elements. This gives a frame to the internal circle because the starting point is the purposes and the end point of process is to compare these purposes and measured results. In the following part instruments will be paired with steps of the internal circle.

Identifying

Knowledge map Mind mapping Knowledge net

Acquiring

Acquision, knowledge products Experts, stakeholders

Development

Trainings E-learning

Sharing

Master-student/apprentice, Mentroing Quality circles, AAR, Retrospect Storytelling, knowledge exchange

Retaining

Data bases Experts' systems

Using

Best Practice Exchange sphere of activity, reorganization

Source: own construction

Figure 3. Probsts model and knowledge sharing instruments

To identify organizational knowledge a knowledge map can be prepared which does not store knowledge but shows where it can be found. Mind mapping is a similar instrument which

focuses on individual knowledge which is possessed by people. Knowledge net has an aim to estimate organizational knowledge but it is a bottom up voluntary initiation. In case of knowledge acquiring four channels are signed which are specified by Probst. They are: acquision, purchasing knowledge products, acquire experts and stakeholders knowledge. Instruments of development are: trainings and e-learning, conferences and workshops. They are suitable to transfer explicit knowledge. Though it must be mentioned that without elearning the other methods are suitable to meet personally which can give a possibility to share implicit knowledge as well. To sharing process implicit instruments are paired. The relationship between master and student/apprentice and the mentor system (mentoring) ensure a possibility to knowledge sharing between two participants, between imparter (master, mentor) and knowledge receiver (apprentice, student). Quality circles, After Action Review (AAR), Retrospect instruments give a possibility to share knowledge collectively (in a group or team). Quality circles operate parallelly with tasks, AAR in the course of projects, at the end of each process, Retrospect gives a possibility to share accumulated knowledge at the end of projects. Knowledge exchange is a collective method as well. In this case participants meet in advance in an organized form, they discuss a problem or topic in small groups for several days long. The base of Storytelling is that knowledge can be shared efficiently by telling stories. To retain knowledge IT methods are available. In this case data bases and experts systems are dominated but knowledge in employees head also has to be mentioned. It has to be understood that shared knowledge by the above listed implicit methods will be stored in employees heads. After that it depends on them if they are ready and capable to use it or not. In case of using the instruments we highlighted those which force employees to make their best to use this knowledge. The Best Practices writes down exactly what and how it has to be done. In this case employees have to use this fixed knowledge. In case of exchange of sphere of activity or in case of reorganization employees have to use and apply the necessary knowledge at a new field.

3.2. TKSP (Tacit Knowledge Sharing Pyramid) model and knowledge sharing methods

As implicit knowledge is in employees heads, losing them goes hand in hand with a risk to lose their knowledge as well. Starting from this problem the following figure shows the instruments which are in close connection with implicit knowledge in the above mentioned model. (lacking totality)

Source: own construction Figure 4. TKSP model and tools of knowledge sharing

The three - dimension Tacit Knowledge Sharing Pyramid together with Probsts model investigate what participants need to do in order to retain, to use, to develop tacit knowledge in organization. In this model each colleagues post is transmitted to another colleague. In the past identifying knowledge and preparation for transfer happened. In this process the leaving colleague and his/her leader are touched. To this case knowledge identifying methods are paired called Knowledge Map and Mind Mapping.

Knowledge map Organizational Knowledge map is an instrument which shows where the necessary knowledge, experience can be found in an organization. The most simple knowledge map is an organigram which contains positions, functions and their relations. But in case of a global or multinational organization computer programs and detailed knowledge databases are needed. (Bgel Tomka, 2010). Knowledge Maps are such databases which show the elements of organizational knowledge but they do not store them. (Varga, 2010). To prepare knowledge maps more methods can be used. Gold Pages character knowledge map will be a result if experts call a database into being which contains every employees competences and knowledge. To prepare this map data can be collected by interviews and self-assessments but in case of employees in great strength asking everybody is not suitable. The other method is the avalanche method when colleagues are asked where they shall turn to to ask help. With this method knowledge stream can be mapped in an organization, but only those colleagues will be in this knowledge map who join in the stream. This way to gauge

everybodys knowledge is not necessary, but employees who do not share their knowledge will be missing from this map. The third method produces a knowledge galaxis. Its essence is that the necessary knowledge elements and their possessors are collected and they are pictured as a graph. In this case a task or process means the starting point not a colleague. (Varga, 2010).

Mind mapping Mind mapping is a similar instrument as a knowledge map, it helps to identify special elements of personal knowledge in an organization. During its preparation the most important experience, cardinal important knowledge elements and key persons of knowledge stream are identified by deep interviews. On these basis the structure of knowledge net it can be determined and a map can be drawn. (Nousala et al., 2009)

In the present dimension knowledge sharing and transfer happened. In this process the leaving and new colleagues and the leader will participate in. In this period there is a possibility to transfer tacit knowledge face to face. To this phase such methods are joined which demand individual participation. Master student/apprentice and mentoring relations demand collaboration between the knowledge imparter and the receiver. An interview is a multilateral method, it can be used to identify critical knowledge of the leaving colleague, at the same time it is a suitable knowledge transfer among the three participants (leader, leaving and new colleagues). Storytelling is marked as well because independently from the number of audience, it is a useful knowledge sharing method by telling a story.

Master student/apprentice relation Very old, but in case of craftsmen is a useful method to transfer knowledge between a master and an apprentice nowadays, too. First the apprentice pays attention only, after he/she works as an auxiliary worker, later he/she can join in more and more processes. When he/she cannot learn more from this master, he/she moves to another master. This way he/she can mix 2-3 masters knowledge and he/she will form an own style and knowledge and he/she can be a master as well. (Kiss, 2011)

Mentoring It is similar to the master student/apprentice method. It is a possibility for a mentor to use his/her knowledge, experience should help the new colleagues professional and personal development. It is a possibility for young apprentices to learn from somebody who has knowledge and experience on a higher level. (Lamm Harder, 2008)

A lot of companies use this method. The cause of its popularity is that a well - planned mentor system is very advantageous for the mentor, the apprentice and for organization, too.

Mentor
It can get new ideas, perspectives from the apprentice; Expansion of professional relationship due to the apprentice; This position is an honour, it shows a commitment to the organization.

Student/apprentice
New ideas, experience can be gained; Higher self-confidence in decisions; To know organizational culture in an easier way; Expansion of personal relationships, development of interpersonal relationships; Supporting to identify weaknesses.

Organization
More collaboration among employees; Clear communication about demands to new employees; Increase of employees' commitment and faithfulness.

Source: own construction on the base of (Lamm Harder, 2008)

Figure 5. Advantages of a mentor system

Interview An interview is a aim oriented talking which does not have hard and fast rules. (Gykr Finna Krajcsk, 2010) HR management often uses it, for example at selection, performance evaluation, if an organization wants to know causes of an employees leaving (exit interview). A learning interview can be fitted to knowledge management which is used if a leaving project members knowledge is wanted to be retained.

Storytelling To tell a story has been a part of human culture for a long time. This way people could learn from other peoples experience. When a story is told, a picture is formed about players and relations we look for. These causes make remembering stories more easily than dry facts. (Baracskai Velencei, 2011)

In the third phase the leaving colleague is not a participant. If the knowledge transfer process was successful, his/her knowledge stays at the organization. To use and develop this knowledge is the task of the new employee because this knowledge can be built into the new colleague knowledge. To store this knowledge in the same way as explicit knowledge is impossible because it happens in the new employees head. As a good method, Best Practice is joined to this phase because it can ensure to retain and use knowledge as a standard. In this case the human factor has a key role.

Best Practice Best Practice is conceivable as a standard. It writes down activities step by step which can be done in the same order, in the same period by anybody and the results will be the same. (Farkas, 2010) To transfer the best practice touches not only the processes but knowledge as well which is needed to these processes. In the three phases of the model it depends on people how they are capable to recognize the importance of knowledge transfer, to identify the critical tacit knowledge, to motivate transfer, to handle new knowledge openly, to retain and use which was learned.

If employees do not feel the importance of the above mentioned components, it cannot be successful in any processes even with the best intention at all.

4. Summary

In this paper the shown models and methods are bases of a diagnostic research. The significance of this approach is that on the basis of these empirical research results organizations can realize that to retain and transfer tacit knowledge is very important in case of visible workforce moving in advance. It has significance from economic and moral viewpoints. The model brings to light a system which shows who, with what kind of tools, with whose competences can support operating processes. This way it is clear that tacit knowledge should not be articulated, should not turn to explicit knowledge in order to make it a part of organizational memory. The final purpose of this research is to prepare a toolbar for companies which supports tacit knowledge sharing. If companies use these tools, they can retain the most important resource, a part of knowledge (tacit part) and with this knowledge

companies can ensure their competitiveness for a long time. In a following paper you can read about the analysed results.

Referencies: 1. Balogh (2011): Az intzmnyi tudsmenedzsment tmogatsa e-learning eszkzk segtsgvel. In: Tudsbl vrat Tudsmenedzsment elmleti s mdszertani megkzeltsben. Noszkay (szerk.) N & B Kiad, Budapest p.9-15. 2. Baracskai Velencei (2011): Amikor a csszr harmadszor stott In: Tudsbl vrat Tudsmenedzsment elmleti s mdszertani megkzeltsben. Noszkay (szerk.) N & B Kiad, Budapest p.16-20. 3. Bencsik (2009): A tudsmenedzsment emberi oldala. Z-Press Kiad, Miskolc 4. Bencsik Slyom (2011): A munkavllalval egytt a tacit tuds is nyugdjba vonul? In: Tudsbl vrat Tudsmenedzsment elmleti s mdszertani megkzeltsben. Noszkay (szerk.) N & B Kiad, Budapest p.36-47. 5. Boda (2001): Tudsmenedzsment Magyarorszgon. In: Karl Erik Sveiby: Szervezetek j gazdagsga: a menedzselt tuds. KJK-KERSZV Jogi s zleti Kiad, Budapest, p.7-42. 6. Bgel Tomka (2010): Tuds s tehetsg CEO Magazin 2010/3. p.27-40. 7. Broadbent, M. (1998). The phenomenon of knowledge management: what does it mean to the information profession? Information Outlook 23-31. Retrieved 20 May 2005 from http://www.sla.org/pubs/serial/io/1998/may98/broadben.html Letltve:2011-11-12 8. Davenport. Prusak (2001): Tudsmenedzsment, Kossuth Kiad, Budapest 9. Dobrai Farkas Karolinyn (2011): Tudsmenedzsment nemzetkzi vllalatok magyarorszgi lenyvllalatainl egy 2010-es empirikus vizsglat tkrben In: Tudsbl vrat Tudsmenedzsment elmleti s mdszertani megkzeltsben. Noszkay (szerk.) N & B Kiad, Budapest p.61-73. 10. Farkas (2010): A fordtott segtlnc A tuds- s tehetsgmenedzsment j eszkzei Harvard Business Review, 2010/4. p. 7-15. 11. Gykr Finna Krajcsk (2010): Emberi erforrs menedzsment. Oktatsi segdanyag. BME Gazdasg- s Trsadalomtudomnyi Kar zleti Tudomnyok Intzet Budapest 12. Kiss (2011): Tudskzssg A hagyomnyrzs legsibb s legkorszerbb formja In: Tudsbl vrat Tudsmenedzsment elmleti s mdszertani megkzeltsben. Noszkay (szerk.) N & B Kiad, Budapest p.136-141. 13. Lamm Harder (2008): Using Mentoring as a Part of Professional Development http://edis.ifas..edu/pdffiles/WC/WC08200.pdf Letltve: 2011. jlius 20. 14. Mladoniczki (2011b): Az After Action Review https://sites.google.com/a/poziteam.net/www/cikkek/azafteractionreview letltve: 2011. jlius 15. 15. Nemeskri (2008): A tuds menedzselse Munkagyi Szemle 2008/4. p. 4-6. 16. Nonaka (2007): A tudsalkot vllalat Harvard Business Manager 2007/12 2008/1 p. 49-57. 17. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995): The knowledge-creating company Oxford University Press New York, Oxford 18. Nousala Miles Kilpatrick Hall (2009): Building knowledge sharing communities using team expertise access maps International Journal Business and Systems Research 2009/3. p. 279-296.

19. North, (2005): Wissensorientierte Unternehmensfhrung. Wertschpfung durch Wissen 4. GWV Fachverlage GmbH. Wiesbaden 20. Probst - Gilbert (1998): Practical Knowledge Management: A Model That Works Building Blocks of Knowledge Management A Practical Approach p.17-29. http://genevaknowledgeforum.ch/downloads/prismartikel.pdf Letltve: 2011. jlius 25. 21. Reinmann - Rothmeier (2001): Wissen managen Das Mnchener Modell LMU - Mnchen Forschungsbericht der LMU - Mnchen 22. Siebert, H. (2007): Vernetztes Lernen Systemisch - konstruktivistische Methoden der Bildungsarbeit Ziel (Grundlagen der Weiterbildung) Augsburg 23. Singh (2003): Building Effective Blended Learning Programs Educational Technology 2003/6. p. 51-54. 24. Streatfield and Wilson (1999): Deconstructing knowledge management Aslib Proceedings 51 (3). p. 67-72. 25. Sveiby (2001): Szervezetek j gazdagsga: a menedzselt tuds. KJK-KERSZV Jogi s zleti Kiad Budapest 26. Tomka (2009): A megosztott tuds hatalom Harmat Kiad Budapest 27. Varga (2010): Tudstrkp http://www.poziteam.net/cikkek/tudasterkep letltve: 2011. jlius 15. 28. Wiig (1994): Knowledge Management Foundations: Thinking About Thinking How People and Organizations Represent, Create and Use Knowledge Schema Press Arlington 29. Wilke, H. (1998): Systemisches Wissensmanagement UTB fr Wissenschaft Stuttgart