Topics

Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge? #case-studies #definition


Mirna Lessinger
 

I'm looking for reference resources and case studies on managing tacit knowledge, specifically in the context of a virtual environment. Are there any resources you would recommend that discuss processes to capture tacit knowledge? I came across "how to enhance tacit knowledge exchange" from from the Henley Forum, but access is restricted. For context, I'd like to enhance the capture of tacit knowledge in Slack communities focused on technical knowledge exchange, and very context-specific inquiries (e.g., "Company X is trying to use application A to deploy use case B...") where the number of possible approaches can be high. Our users are of different backgrounds (e.g., professional services, support engineers, customer success managers) and I'm not sure a Q&A and topic categorization is sufficient to manage, specially in the context of searching. My sense is that we need an additional "layer" of categorization beyond the basic Q&A and product/solution type, but I don't know yet what would that be or how to identify it.


 

Hi Mirna
You may already be familiar with this page from The KCS Practices Guide that may assist in identifying additional categorizations for context specific, technical knowledge exchange: 
Beth


Leif Edvinsson
 

Hello Mirna,good focus. Also called Relationl Capital. There are many . Among the most interesting  might be orof Noburo Konno, in close cooperation with prof Nonaka, Japan. Just this morning they run a webinar on Ba; FCAJ and Topis conference 

 Also check  at FCAJ; and Ecosyx Lab

mån 7 sep. 2020 kl. 19:41 skrev Mirna Lessinger <mircf7@...>:

I'm looking for reference resources and case studies on managing tacit knowledge, specifically in the context of a virtual environment. Are there any resources you would recommend that discuss processes to capture tacit knowledge? I came across "how to enhance tacit knowledge exchange" from from the Henley Forum, but access is restricted. For context, I'd like to enhance the capture of tacit knowledge in Slack communities focused on technical knowledge exchange, and very context-specific inquiries (e.g., "Company X is trying to use application A to deploy use case B...") where the number of possible approaches can be high. Our users are of different backgrounds (e.g., professional services, support engineers, customer success managers) and I'm not sure a Q&A and topic categorization is sufficient to manage, specially in the context of searching. My sense is that we need an additional "layer" of categorization beyond the basic Q&A and product/solution type, but I don't know yet what would that be or how to identify it.








Leif Edvinsson
 


mån 7 sep. 2020 kl. 21:53 skrev Leif Edvinsson via groups.io <leifedvinsson=gmail.com@groups.io>:

Hello Mirna,good focus. Also called Relationl Capital. There are many . Among the most interesting  might be orof Noburo Konno, in close cooperation with prof Nonaka, Japan. Just this morning they run a webinar on Ba; FCAJ and Topis conference 

 Also check  at FCAJ; and Ecosyx Lab

mån 7 sep. 2020 kl. 19:41 skrev Mirna Lessinger <mircf7@...>:
I'm looking for reference resources and case studies on managing tacit knowledge, specifically in the context of a virtual environment. Are there any resources you would recommend that discuss processes to capture tacit knowledge? I came across "how to enhance tacit knowledge exchange" from from the Henley Forum, but access is restricted. For context, I'd like to enhance the capture of tacit knowledge in Slack communities focused on technical knowledge exchange, and very context-specific inquiries (e.g., "Company X is trying to use application A to deploy use case B...") where the number of possible approaches can be high. Our users are of different backgrounds (e.g., professional services, support engineers, customer success managers) and I'm not sure a Q&A and topic categorization is sufficient to manage, specially in the context of searching. My sense is that we need an additional "layer" of categorization beyond the basic Q&A and product/solution type, but I don't know yet what would that be or how to identify it.
















Nancy Dixon
 

Mirna,
I wrote a recent blog post on the topic, The Ten Big Ideas of Knowledge Management https://www.nancydixonblog.com/2020/08/the-big-ideas-of-knowledge-management.html.  As you can see in the post, I believe it is more important to exchange it than to capture it because our tacit knowledge is most available to us when we need to draw on it to answer a question or solve a problem. So see what you think.

Nancy 

On Sep 7, 2020, at 12:41 PM, Mirna Lessinger via groups.io <mircf7@...> wrote:

I'm looking for reference resources and case studies on managing tacit knowledge, specifically in the context of a virtual environment. Are there any resources you would recommend that discuss processes to capture tacit knowledge? I came across "how to enhance tacit knowledge exchange" from from the Henley Forum, but access is restricted. For context, I'd like to enhance the capture of tacit knowledge in Slack communities focused on technical knowledge exchange, and very context-specific inquiries (e.g., "Company X is trying to use application A to deploy use case B...") where the number of possible approaches can be high. Our users are of different backgrounds (e.g., professional services, support engineers, customer success managers) and I'm not sure a Q&A and topic categorization is sufficient to manage, specially in the context of searching. My sense is that we need an additional "layer" of categorization beyond the basic Q&A and product/solution type, but I don't know yet what would that be or how to identify it.


 

HI Mirna

 

I would be glad to have a zoom call with you to discuss this topic. I sometimes have a different perspective on tacit and explicit knowledge than my colleagues…more focused on the practical use of knowledge and the flow of knowledge within an organization.  Offer open to you to contact me and we can set up a time. An opportunity  to add an alternative perspective to all of the other good insights you will receive from this experienced group.

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Nancy Dixon via groups.io
Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 13:07
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

 

Mirna,

I wrote a recent blog post on the topic, The Ten Big Ideas of Knowledge Management https://www.nancydixonblog.com/2020/08/the-big-ideas-of-knowledge-management.html.  As you can see in the post, I believe it is more important to exchange it than to capture it because our tacit knowledge is most available to us when we need to draw on it to answer a question or solve a problem. So see what you think.

 

Nancy 



On Sep 7, 2020, at 12:41 PM, Mirna Lessinger via groups.io <mircf7@...> wrote:

 

I'm looking for reference resources and case studies on managing tacit knowledge, specifically in the context of a virtual environment. Are there any resources you would recommend that discuss processes to capture tacit knowledge? I came across "how to enhance tacit knowledge exchange" from from the Henley Forum, but access is restricted. For context, I'd like to enhance the capture of tacit knowledge in Slack communities focused on technical knowledge exchange, and very context-specific inquiries (e.g., "Company X is trying to use application A to deploy use case B...") where the number of possible approaches can be high. Our users are of different backgrounds (e.g., professional services, support engineers, customer success managers) and I'm not sure a Q&A and topic categorization is sufficient to manage, specially in the context of searching. My sense is that we need an additional "layer" of categorization beyond the basic Q&A and product/solution type, but I don't know yet what would that be or how to identify it.

 


Stan Garfield
 

Bill, please share your different perspective here in an additional reply. This will allow all members to benefit. Thanks!


Stan Garfield
 

Mirna, here is a resource that may be of interest. How can tacit knowledge be transferred or shared?


Bruce Boyes
 

Hi Mirna, the references in this article may be of interest.

Best regards, 
Bruce.



On Tuesday, 8 September 2020, 07:04:16 am AEST, Stan Garfield <stangarfield@...> wrote:


Mirna, here is a resource that may be of interest. How can tacit knowledge be transferred or shared?


Mirna Lessinger
 

Thank you Beth. Indeed, I'm familiar with KCS recommendations and use these in our program. The effort I mentioned above is beyond KCS and not in the context of support case management. It could be related but not directly applicable. 


Douglas Weidner
 

Mirna,
Sorry to be late on this.

At the KM Institute, we teach a number of proven K Transfer and Capture techniques, depending on the application. For instance, if applicable, our K Transfer and Retention technique works best if you are focusing on transferring expert knowledge to those with less experience. It was originally designed to focus on Baby Boomer retirements, to pass on their CRITICAL knowledge to successors. But of course this technique can be applied to any scenario where critical knowledge, typically in the heads of the few, can be transferred to successors.

University research claims about 91% of critical K is transferred, which compares favorably with both mentoring, about 60% and exit interviews, which are essentially useless despite their popularity.

If you'd like to know more, please ping me.

Douglas Weidner
Exec Chairman, KM Institute

On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 11:03 AM Mirna Lessinger <mircf7@...> wrote:
Thank you Beth. Indeed, I'm familiar with KCS recommendations and use these in our program. The effort I mentioned above is beyond KCS and not in the context of support case management. It could be related but not directly applicable. 


Tami Dubi
 

Hi Mirna,
I have encountered some issues with Slack in the past, so I can relate.  but I am not sure what you are looking for exactly.
Could you please elaborate on the "capture needs"? for instance:
1. When you say "tacit knowledge" is the knowledge shared in the groups in Slack and you want :
     A. To retain the knowledge shared in Slack selective groups? or
     B. Do you want to encourage people to share their knowledge in slack groups?
2. Are you looking for an automatic way of capturing the knowledge in Slack?




Laurence Lock Lee
 

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.


Murray Jennex
 

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.


Patrick Lambe
 

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 

My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.

Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 

In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.

I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.

So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com


On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.


Murray Jennex
 

I hear you Patrick and mostly agree, to me understanding something means I can articulate it to someone else, this is perhaps something I've learned by being a professor, I can't teach something I can't articulate (and this means you can't transfer what you can't articulate).  Of course I talk about tacit knowledge and in particular use sports metaphors, however, you will not disrupt my serve or strokes by asking me to explain them as I've been a tennis coach and the same applies there, you can't coach what you can't articulate.  All that said, I don't worry about instinctive knowledge, I understand that to be something buried in my brain that comes out when I need it, however, when it does come out I strive to articulate it.  I agree with you that it isn't a clean 1:1 swap, nothing ever is and so don't take my statements as being 100%, but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it.  I don't worry if that means there is no tacit knowledge, that is just a gut feel of mine, but hey, it does spur some really good discussions!  I love to use Tony Gwynn as an example of someone who was perhaps the best hitter in baseball but when he coached our college team we were only average hitters.  Does that mean Tony didn't really understand the knowledge of hitting?  I don't think so, he just had special physical tools that made it so that he could do what he said while others couldn't.  Perhaps we combine instinct and other physical attributes with what we call knowledge?  I'd argue we have the knowledge and are confusing that with performance or putting the knowledge in action, sometimes we know what we want to do but just can't do it!....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Cc: llocklee@... <llocklee@...>
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 

My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.

Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 

In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.

I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.

So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com


On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.


Douglas Weidner
 

Excellent discussion on an age-old topic: tacit vs. explicit.
Some have long claimed tacit is knowledge and explicit is just information. The ISO 30401:2018 argues otherwise. I do as well.

Here's a few further arguments on topics already raised.
Physical K - whether a hitter is good or not is probably less dependent on exactly correct form than the essence of a 10,000 hr. rule.

As for "but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it," I agree and would go one step further. For me, the detailed articulation is the intellectual challenge that provides great insights. Almost as if the articulation forces you to open and inspect every nook and cranny of your brain's synapse connections.

Lastly, if you strive to formalize a tacit to explicit process, for whatever unique purpose such as retirement, consider some truths: if the articulation is one-on-one (Mentoring?) it may be less efficient than a one-on-many process; and, if you can easily codify as you articulate, you expand the effective use even further.

Sometimes, merely paying attention to obvious truisms can provide great benefit.

Douglas Weidner
Exec Chairman, 
KM Institute.org 


On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 3:42 AM Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
I hear you Patrick and mostly agree, to me understanding something means I can articulate it to someone else, this is perhaps something I've learned by being a professor, I can't teach something I can't articulate (and this means you can't transfer what you can't articulate).  Of course I talk about tacit knowledge and in particular use sports metaphors, however, you will not disrupt my serve or strokes by asking me to explain them as I've been a tennis coach and the same applies there, you can't coach what you can't articulate.  All that said, I don't worry about instinctive knowledge, I understand that to be something buried in my brain that comes out when I need it, however, when it does come out I strive to articulate it.  I agree with you that it isn't a clean 1:1 swap, nothing ever is and so don't take my statements as being 100%, but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it.  I don't worry if that means there is no tacit knowledge, that is just a gut feel of mine, but hey, it does spur some really good discussions!  I love to use Tony Gwynn as an example of someone who was perhaps the best hitter in baseball but when he coached our college team we were only average hitters.  Does that mean Tony didn't really understand the knowledge of hitting?  I don't think so, he just had special physical tools that made it so that he could do what he said while others couldn't.  Perhaps we combine instinct and other physical attributes with what we call knowledge?  I'd argue we have the knowledge and are confusing that with performance or putting the knowledge in action, sometimes we know what we want to do but just can't do it!....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Cc: llocklee@... <llocklee@...>
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 

My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.

Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 

In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.

I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.

So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com


On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.


Robert L. Bogue
 
Edited

Re: 10,000 hr rule … the original research never said that.  That’s Malcolm Gladwell’s simplification in Outliers  (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2009/07/29/book-review-outliers/)  Anders Ericsson clarified in Peak (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2016/07/11/book-review-peak-secrets-from-the-new-science-of-expertise/) that the factor was purposeful practice.

 

For me, this merges both “the perfect form” and practice.  If you practice enough, and you’re willing to accept performance setbacks to try new forms, you’ll eventually settle on the “perfect” one.  However, even discovering the “perfect” stance doesn’t mean you’ll be able to explain it.  (ala tacit)  Observers can only get to the observable factors, many unobservable factors remain.

 

I don’t know that I think about teaching tacit (and therefore requiring the articulation that Murray explains) rather, I view tacit as creating the conditions to accelerate the discovery of the tacit knowledge.  See Gary Klein’s work in Seeing What Other’s Don’t (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2014/12/23/book-review-seeing-what-others-dont-the-remarkable-ways-we-gain-insights/)  and Sources of Power (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2011/10/23/book-review-sources-of-power-how-people-make-decisions/)

 

When I relax the conditions from teaching to coaching on tacit, I realize that I don’t have to be able to articulate every nuance as long as I create situations that accelerates the learning process.

 

Rob

 

-------------------

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it.

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Douglas Weidner via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:38 AM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Cc: plambe@...; llocklee@...
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

 

Excellent discussion on an age-old topic: tacit vs. explicit.

Some have long claimed tacit is knowledge and explicit is just information. The ISO 30401:2018 argues otherwise. I do as well.

 

Here's a few further arguments on topics already raised.

Physical K - whether a hitter is good or not is probably less dependent on exactly correct form than the essence of a 10,000 hr. rule.

 

As for "but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it," I agree and would go one step further. For me, the detailed articulation is the intellectual challenge that provides great insights. Almost as if the articulation forces you to open and inspect every nook and cranny of your brain's synapse connections.

 

Lastly, if you strive to formalize a tacit to explicit process, for whatever unique purpose such as retirement, consider some truths: if the articulation is one-on-one (Mentoring?) it may be less efficient than a one-on-many process; and, if you can easily codify as you articulate, you expand the effective use even further.

 

Sometimes, merely paying attention to obvious truisms can provide great benefit.

 

Douglas Weidner

Exec Chairman, 

KM Institute.org 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 3:42 AM Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I hear you Patrick and mostly agree, to me understanding something means I can articulate it to someone else, this is perhaps something I've learned by being a professor, I can't teach something I can't articulate (and this means you can't transfer what you can't articulate).  Of course I talk about tacit knowledge and in particular use sports metaphors, however, you will not disrupt my serve or strokes by asking me to explain them as I've been a tennis coach and the same applies there, you can't coach what you can't articulate.  All that said, I don't worry about instinctive knowledge, I understand that to be something buried in my brain that comes out when I need it, however, when it does come out I strive to articulate it.  I agree with you that it isn't a clean 1:1 swap, nothing ever is and so don't take my statements as being 100%, but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it.  I don't worry if that means there is no tacit knowledge, that is just a gut feel of mine, but hey, it does spur some really good discussions!  I love to use Tony Gwynn as an example of someone who was perhaps the best hitter in baseball but when he coached our college team we were only average hitters.  Does that mean Tony didn't really understand the knowledge of hitting?  I don't think so, he just had special physical tools that made it so that he could do what he said while others couldn't.  Perhaps we combine instinct and other physical attributes with what we call knowledge?  I'd argue we have the knowledge and are confusing that with performance or putting the knowledge in action, sometimes we know what we want to do but just can't do it!....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Cc: llocklee@... <llocklee@...>
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 

 

My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.

 

Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 

 

In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.

 

I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.

 

So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.

 

P

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com

 

On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

 

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.

 

 


Patrick Lambe
 

Great to see Gary Klein’s work being brought in Rob.

It seems to me that explication is an entirely different kind of knowledge activity than understanding or knowing, or knowing how to. They are of course connected. Explication requires reasoning, observation, contextualisation, knowledge integration and translation. In fact it could be said to be a form of knowledge building. 

If I’m working on a piece of writing, I am of course working out of "the ground" of what I know (in my head and body), but there’s a long and venerable tradition of thinking from Ryle through Polanyi and McIntyre that says that this tacit ground of knowing is inarticulable, and once you articulate you’ve created an entirely different form of knowledge that connects only in a loose way to the “knowledge ground” that produced it, you have not simply “converted” the tacit knowledge. Polanyi does acknowledge that articulation can provide a feedback loop to deepen our tacit knowledge (so explication of techniques can improve piano playing) but he was adamant that they are fundamentally different kinds of thing. Tacit and explicit knowledge forms in their various degrees of combination follow each other around, but they are not blood relatives. Neither is reducible to the other.

If I am working on that piece of writing, I’m not simply trying to represent what’s in me. I’m also trying to connect it to what I know about (out there in the world), which I may need to explore or think about more deeply, and I’m trying to connect to it to what I know about my audience, which I may need to observe and reflect on more carefully, so there’s a sense in which it feels like a journey of discovery, as much as simply expressing something I know. The whole thing feels much more like the interaction of various cognitive activities, and it feels like an iterative process full of feedback loops, interacting back and forth with the world, not at all like a simple “produce something out of my head” kind of activity. I’m building something, not converting something. And my building blocks are out there in the world as much as in my head and body.

And I’m with you Rob, that explication/articulation is only one mode of moving knowledge around (or replicating it) - “creating the conditions to accelerate the discovery of tacit knowledge” is a nice way of putting it. To bring this back to Laurie’s contribution, this is why an understanding of networks and collaboration is useful - because they can provide enabling or disabling conditions.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com


On 9 Sep 2020, at 7:51 PM, Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:

Re: 10,000 hr rule … the original research never said that.  That’s Malcolm Gladwell’s simplification in Outliers  (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2009/07/29/book-review-outliers/)  Anders Ericsson clarified in Peak (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2016/07/11/book-review-peak-secrets-from-the-new-science-of-expertise/) that the factor was purposeful practice.
 
For me, this merges both “the perfect form” and practice.  If you practice enough, and you’re willing to accept performance setbacks to try new forms, you’ll eventually settle on the “perfect” one.  However, even discovering the “perfect” stance doesn’t mean you’ll be able to explain it.  (ala tacit)  Observers can only get to the observable factors, many unobservable factors remain.
 
I don’t know that I think about teaching tacit (and therefore requiring the articulation that Murrey explains) rather, I view tacit as creating the conditions to accelerate the discovery of the tacit knowledge.  See Gary Klein’s work in Seeing What Other’s Don’t (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2014/12/23/book-review-seeing-what-others-dont-the-remarkable-ways-we-gain-insights/)  and Sources of Power (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2011/10/23/book-review-sources-of-power-how-people-make-decisions/)
 
When I relax the conditions from teaching to coaching on tacit, I realize that I don’t have to be able to articulate every nuance as long as I create situations that accelerates the learning process.
 
Rob
 
-------------------
Robert L. Bogue
O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog
Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it.
 
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Douglas Weidner via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:38 AM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Cc: plambe@...; llocklee@...
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?
 
Excellent discussion on an age-old topic: tacit vs. explicit.
Some have long claimed tacit is knowledge and explicit is just information. The ISO 30401:2018 argues otherwise. I do as well.
 
Here's a few further arguments on topics already raised.
Physical K - whether a hitter is good or not is probably less dependent on exactly correct form than the essence of a 10,000 hr. rule.
 
As for "but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it," I agree and would go one step further. For me, the detailed articulation is the intellectual challenge that provides great insights. Almost as if the articulation forces you to open and inspect every nook and cranny of your brain's synapse connections.
 
Lastly, if you strive to formalize a tacit to explicit process, for whatever unique purpose such as retirement, consider some truths: if the articulation is one-on-one (Mentoring?) it may be less efficient than a one-on-manyprocess; and, if you can easily codify as you articulate, you expand the effective use even further.
 
Sometimes, merely paying attention to obvious truisms can provide great benefit.
 
Douglas Weidner
Exec Chairman, 
 
 
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 3:42 AM Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I hear you Patrick and mostly agree, to me understanding something means I can articulate it to someone else, this is perhaps something I've learned by being a professor, I can't teach something I can't articulate (and this means you can't transfer what you can't articulate).  Of course I talk about tacit knowledge and in particular use sports metaphors, however, you will not disrupt my serve or strokes by asking me to explain them as I've been a tennis coach and the same applies there, you can't coach what you can't articulate.  All that said, I don't worry about instinctive knowledge, I understand that to be something buried in my brain that comes out when I need it, however, when it does come out I strive to articulate it.  I agree with you that it isn't a clean 1:1 swap, nothing ever is and so don't take my statements as being 100%, but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it.  I don't worry if that means there is no tacit knowledge, that is just a gut feel of mine, but hey, it does spur some really good discussions!  I love to use Tony Gwynn as an example of someone who was perhaps the best hitter in baseball but when he coached our college team we were only average hitters.  Does that mean Tony didn't really understand the knowledge of hitting?  I don't think so, he just had special physical tools that made it so that he could do what he said while others couldn't.  Perhaps we combine instinct and other physical attributes with what we call knowledge?  I'd argue we have the knowledge and are confusing that with performance or putting the knowledge in action, sometimes we know what we want to do but just can't do it!....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Cc: llocklee@... <llocklee@...>
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 
 
My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.
 
Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 
 
In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.
 
I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.
 
So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.
 
P
 
Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com

<image001.jpg>
 
On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:
 

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.
 



Chris Collison
 

Spot on.  I’m looking for the *Like* button Patrick!

 

I think Senge expressed a lot of this fascinating thread succinctly in his quote:

 

“Sharing knowledge is not about giving people something, or getting something from them. That is only valid for information sharing. Sharing knowledge occurs when people are genuinely interested in helping one another develop new capacities for action; it is about creating learning processes.”

 

 

 

From: <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, 9 September 2020 at 13:36
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Cc: "llocklee@..." <llocklee@...>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

 

Great to see Gary Klein’s work being brought in Rob.

 

It seems to me that explication is an entirely different kind of knowledge activity than understanding or knowing, or knowing how to. They are of course connected. Explication requires reasoning, observation, contextualisation, knowledge integration and translation. In fact it could be said to be a form of knowledge building. 

 

If I’m working on a piece of writing, I am of course working out of "the ground" of what I know (in my head and body), but there’s a long and venerable tradition of thinking from Ryle through Polanyi and McIntyre that says that this tacit ground of knowing is inarticulable, and once you articulate you’ve created an entirely different form of knowledge that connects only in a loose way to the “knowledge ground” that produced it, you have not simply “converted” the tacit knowledge. Polanyi does acknowledge that articulation can provide a feedback loop to deepen our tacit knowledge (so explication of techniques can improve piano playing) but he was adamant that they are fundamentally different kinds of thing. Tacit and explicit knowledge forms in their various degrees of combination follow each other around, but they are not blood relatives. Neither is reducible to the other.

 

If I am working on that piece of writing, I’m not simply trying to represent what’s in me. I’m also trying to connect it to what I know about (out there in the world), which I may need to explore or think about more deeply, and I’m trying to connect to it to what I know about my audience, which I may need to observe and reflect on more carefully, so there’s a sense in which it feels like a journey of discovery, as much as simply expressing something I know. The whole thing feels much more like the interaction of various cognitive activities, and it feels like an iterative process full of feedback loops, interacting back and forth with the world, not at all like a simple “produce something out of my head” kind of activity. I’m building something, not converting something. And my building blocks are out there in the world as much as in my head and body.

 

And I’m with you Rob, that explication/articulation is only one mode of moving knowledge around (or replicating it) - “creating the conditions to accelerate the discovery of tacit knowledge” is a nice way of putting it. To bring this back to Laurie’s contribution, this is why an understanding of networks and collaboration is useful - because they can provide enabling or disabling conditions.

 

P

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com

 

On 9 Sep 2020, at 7:51 PM, Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:

 

Re: 10,000 hr rule … the original research never said that.  That’s Malcolm Gladwell’s simplification in Outliers  (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2009/07/29/book-review-outliers/)  Anders Ericsson clarified in Peak (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2016/07/11/book-review-peak-secrets-from-the-new-science-of-expertise/) that the factor was purposeful practice.

 

For me, this merges both “the perfect form” and practice.  If you practice enough, and you’re willing to accept performance setbacks to try new forms, you’ll eventually settle on the “perfect” one.  However, even discovering the “perfect” stance doesn’t mean you’ll be able to explain it.  (ala tacit)  Observers can only get to the observable factors, many unobservable factors remain.

 

I don’t know that I think about teaching tacit (and therefore requiring the articulation that Murrey explains) rather, I view tacit as creating the conditions to accelerate the discovery of the tacit knowledge.  See Gary Klein’s work in Seeing What Other’s Don’t (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2014/12/23/book-review-seeing-what-others-dont-the-remarkable-ways-we-gain-insights/)  and Sources of Power (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2011/10/23/book-review-sources-of-power-how-people-make-decisions/)

 

When I relax the conditions from teaching to coaching on tacit, I realize that I don’t have to be able to articulate every nuance as long as I create situations that accelerates the learning process.

 

Rob

 

-------------------

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it.

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Douglas Weidner via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:38 AM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Cc: plambe@...; llocklee@...
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

 

Excellent discussion on an age-old topic: tacit vs. explicit.

Some have long claimed tacit is knowledge and explicit is just information. The ISO 30401:2018 argues otherwise. I do as well.

 

Here's a few further arguments on topics already raised.

Physical K - whether a hitter is good or not is probably less dependent on exactly correct form than the essence of a 10,000 hr. rule.

 

As for "but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it," I agree and would go one step further. For me, the detailed articulation is the intellectual challenge that provides great insights. Almost as if the articulation forces you to open and inspect every nook and cranny of your brain's synapse connections.

 

Lastly, if you strive to formalize a tacit to explicit process, for whatever unique purpose such as retirement, consider some truths: if the articulation is one-on-one (Mentoring?) it may be less efficient than a one-on-manyprocess; and, if you can easily codify as you articulate, you expand the effective use even further.

 

Sometimes, merely paying attention to obvious truisms can provide great benefit.

 

Douglas Weidner

Exec Chairman, 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 3:42 AM Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I hear you Patrick and mostly agree, to me understanding something means I can articulate it to someone else, this is perhaps something I've learned by being a professor, I can't teach something I can't articulate (and this means you can't transfer what you can't articulate).  Of course I talk about tacit knowledge and in particular use sports metaphors, however, you will not disrupt my serve or strokes by asking me to explain them as I've been a tennis coach and the same applies there, you can't coach what you can't articulate.  All that said, I don't worry about instinctive knowledge, I understand that to be something buried in my brain that comes out when I need it, however, when it does come out I strive to articulate it.  I agree with you that it isn't a clean 1:1 swap, nothing ever is and so don't take my statements as being 100%, but I do really believe that you can't know something until you can articulate it.  I don't worry if that means there is no tacit knowledge, that is just a gut feel of mine, but hey, it does spur some really good discussions!  I love to use Tony Gwynn as an example of someone who was perhaps the best hitter in baseball but when he coached our college team we were only average hitters.  Does that mean Tony didn't really understand the knowledge of hitting?  I don't think so, he just had special physical tools that made it so that he could do what he said while others couldn't.  Perhaps we combine instinct and other physical attributes with what we call knowledge?  I'd argue we have the knowledge and are confusing that with performance or putting the knowledge in action, sometimes we know what we want to do but just can't do it!....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Cc: llocklee@... <llocklee@...>
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Hi Murray I would just swap out one word in your sentence 

 

My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you [understand] can articulate it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet.

 

Speaking for myself, I often think I understand something without being able to articulate it (maybe that’s an illusion!!), and sometimes I can articulate the same understanding in quite different ways depending on the context. 

 

In relation to tacit knowledge, of course there’s the whole area of somatic knowledge (things my body knows how to do) where words can be descriptive but virtually useless - i.e. the articulation of the knowledge “hold the violin bow at an angle of 30 degrees to the strings” doesn’t really express the knowledge in the same way that a recipe might. So being able to express how I ride the bike doesn’t accurately represent the tacit knowledge involved.

 

I have a friend who regularly (and deliberately) disrupted his (very skilful) tennis buddy’s serves by asking him to explain how he did it. Shifting his buddy’s focus from his bodily knowledge to a poor verbal expression of it, distracted his body from actually being able to deliver the serve effectively.

 

So while I agree with your general point, we do need to recognise that there isn’t a clean 1:1 convertibility from explicit-tacit or vice versa. In fact the dualism between tacit and explicit is far too simplistic - which I think is where your first comment was going.

 

P

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

web:  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:  www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:  www.aithinsoftware.com

<image001.jpg>

 

On 9 Sep 2020, at 2:05 PM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

 

Actually, many would argue that there is no such thing as purely tacit knowledge or purely explicit knowledge, that both have degrees of tacitness and explicitness and that the degree of each varies with the knowledge user/holder.  Capturing tacit just means we've made it more explicit, it doesn't reduce its value and actually may increase it.  My own feeling is that all knowledge is explicit once you understand it, i.e. tacit knowledge is simply knowledge we haven't learned to express yet....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Lock Lee <llocklee@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2020 4:15 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Reference resources, case studies about managing tacit knowledge?

Many would argue that once tacit knowledge is captured it is no longer tacit, and therefore degraded. If your intention is to benefit from online exchanges through the sharing of tacit knowledge it is therefore far more important to identify the holders of that tacit knowledge and to connect with them one on one for knowledge exchange and skip the translation to explicit knowledge and back to tacit processes. Organisational/Social network analysis is a good way to find experts. Our business conducts ONA/SNA online through Yammer Teams and Workplace by facebook (not Slack though ...that is another story) ... we have lots of case studies on our site www.swoopanalytics.com.