MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336508201 · doi:10.15533/sdm/2011/v2i1/28799

The Use of Tacit Knowledge to Create Organizational Value

2011· article· en· W2336508201 on OpenAlex
Olga Moros, Carolan McLarney

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSDMIMD Journal of Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTacit knowledgePersonal knowledge managementKnowledge managementKnowledge value chainBody of knowledgeOrganizational learningContext (archaeology)Explicit knowledgeSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews, explains, compares, and synthesizes the foundational theories in knowledge management. Its central theme is that knowledge management and knowledge creation are two crucial aspects of strategic management in modern organizations. The identification of the unique properties of knowledge is a starting point for its successful creation and management in organizations. The article briefly examines the context of knowledge management by looking into the originating disciplines and related theories as well as outlines the life and achievements of the most influential scholar in the field - Michael Polanyi. Next, the article discusses the various characteristics of knowledge important for its further successful application, specifically 'tacit knowledge'. It then looks into the main theories that involve application of tacit knowledge to modern business organizations. Although several disciplines and theories include some aspects of knowledge management, due to the limited scope of this article, only the two that specifically develop the 'tacit knowledge' concept are studied here. Additionally, while some theories discussed in this article are applicable to various levels of analysis, such as individual, group, organization, and inter-organizational, this review is limited to knowledge management and creation within a business organization. The methodology for this research article consisted of secondary research on the influential works on knowledge management. It involved primary sources, when discussing the properties of knowledge and the foundational theories, and secondary sources that provided researchers' opinion on the importance of the subject. The research on the knowledge management in organizations demonstrated the uniqueness of the qualities of knowledge that puzzled scholars since the Ancient Greeks, the importance of the personal component in any successful knowledge related process, the magnitude of the topic that undoubtedly warrants further research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it