In spirit of learning, here are slides where John Hovell (BAE) & I (Columbia) compare Knowledge Continuity (embodying knowledge for succession) and Knowledge Jam (codifying knowledge for innovation).

1. Tacit Knowledge Elicitation
and Transfer
Dimensions for selecting and
understanding the different approaches
Draft for discussion
Revised 3/15/14
Kate Pugh, Columbia University and
AlignConsulting katepugh@alum.mit.edu
www.alignconsultinginc.com
Sharing Hidden Know-How
(Jossey-Bass, 2011)
John Hovell, STRATactical
johnhovell@gmail.com
www.stratactical.com
Making It Real: Sustainable Knowledge
Management (ACPI 2013)
1Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

2. What’s elusive about tacit knowledge
and what should we pay attention to?
• One of the great management ideas of the
last twenty years has been to make use of the
knowledge that our organization has already
learned, rather than having each new team or
person learn those lessons for themselves.
• Managers in all types of organizations
express that failure in their everyday
language: “We reinvent the wheel!” or “We
seem to have to keep learning that same
lesson over and over.”
• There are three main issues:
– We have blind spots (we don’t know who know
whom, who knows what, and who does what)
– We have mismatches (even when we elicit
knowledge, it’s not useful to the receivers)
– We have jails (knowledge elicited doesn’t go
anywhere – it sits on hard drives, doc stores or in
people’s heads)
2Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer
Image thanks to Parcel/Collison
“Learning to Fly”

3. What’s elusive about tacit knowledge and
what should we pay attention to? (cont’d)
• The answer lies in having systematic processes. We need to:
– Identify and get out tacit knowledge
– Get knowledge into circulation -- putting knowledge to work
• Context and purpose matter. In the following slides we talk
selecting or designing an elicitation based on context:
– Where does the knowledge reside?
– Who’s eager to get it?
– Do we understand the actual job to be done? (is it the right
knowledge?)
– Where does it need to go in the organization’s (or the customer’s)
work? And, in what form?
– How does the environment or political structure support the
process?
3Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

4. Bird’s Eye View of the Tacit
Knowledge Elicitation
Approaches
(Using the simplest dimensions, how are the
methods different?)
4Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

5. Bird’s Eye View: Comparing Knowledge
Capture-Transfer Methods
Facilitation (is the
elicitation
facilitated?)
Conversation
(is it “many
to many”)
Translation
(is knowledge
get put to
work in the
process?)
Search/Alerts
Clipping services
Decision-support
systems
After Action Review
Wiki-thon
Yam Jams
Mentoring
Discussion Forums
Story telling
Reporting Interview
Appreciative Inquiry
Knowledge Harvesting
Community
of Practice
Master Class
Retrospect
Knowledge
Jam,
Knowledge
Continuity
Peer Assist
5
Instructional
Design
(not in graphic)
Individual Journaling
or Procedure Writing
IBM Innovation
Jam™
Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

6. Nine Polarities for comparing
knowledge elicitation approaches
(Let’s go deeper. What are all of the choices?)
6Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

7. What are our choices when we select a
knowledge elicitation approach?
Polarity This polarity sparks the question:
1. Group of originators/experts v.
indiv. originator/expert
Does the knowledge reside in the collective minds or in the individual
expert?
2. Conversation (group of
receivers/brokers) v. interview v.
individual's diary
Is the knowledge elicited as a group conversation (e.g., between originators
and brokers or seekers), an interview, or just an individual doing a diary.
3. Scaffolded v. free form Is there a structure, such as an outline, or rubric for thinking about the
content, or is there more spontaneity in the flow of the elicitation?
4. Facilitated v. self-facilitated by
the group
Is there a facilitator who is managing the process , and more importantly, the
elicitation event?
5. Synchronous v. asynchronous Is knowledge emerging in real-time, e.g., through a conversation, or
asynchronously, e.g., through an online discussion and discussion posts?
6. Translated v. elicited only Does the process include a formal step to translate the knowledge directly
into an outcome? (Note: this is likely to correlate with #2 “Conversation,” as
brokers will have a drive to move toward output.
7. Codified v. embodied Is the knowledge codified, e.g., in a word document or process flow that is
the property of the collective, or is it embodied in the learners (e.g.,
“Nextperts’) or listeners? (In the latter sense, the listeners may do a private
codification.)
8. Measured/bus. value v. ended
at capture
Is there an explicit step to measure the outcome of the knowledge in its next
incarnation after the elicitation?
9. Sponsored and planned v.
Unsponsored/Spontaneous
Is the whole event planned and sponsored with the clear line to leadership,
or is it more spontaneously initiated by the team?
7Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

8. Use polarities to describe tacit knowledge elicitation and transfer
Group of originators/experts Indiv. originator/expert
Conversation (group of receivers/brokers) interview Individual's diary
Scaffolded Free form
Facilitated Self-facilitated by the group
Synchronous Asynchronous
Translated Elicit only
Codified Embodied
Measured/bus. value Ended at capture
Sponsored and planned Unsponsored/Spontaneous
8

9. Knowledge Jam and Knowledge Continuity:
Similar processes with different goals
• Knowledge Jam and Knowledge Continuity are very similar
in that they are collaborative processes for eliciting
knowledge.
• Knowledge is
– “Codified for innovation” in Knowledge Jam
– “Embodied for succession” in Knowledge Continuity
• Ownership / audience targeting:
– Knowledge Jam is motivated by issues around markets or cost
objectives. (Thus, it is often driven by people worried about
business unit or functional performance).
– Knowledge Continuity is generally more motivated by issues
around human capital disappearing (Thus, it is often driven by
people worried about succession)
Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer 9

10. Read about Knowledge
Elicitation
(Just some helpful references)
10Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer

11. Read About Knowledge Elicitation
Sharing Hidden Know-How Book, by
Katrina Pugh (Jossey-Bass, April 2011)
11Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer
Making it Real: Sustaining KM Book,
Edited by Annie Green (ACPI 2013)

12. Additional Reading
Books
• Sharing Hidden Know-How Book (Jossey-Bass, April 2011)
• Making it Real: Sustaining KM Book (ACPI, 2013)
Blogs
• We Know More Than We Can Say (Blog by Nancy Dixon, 2013)
Articles
• “Don’t Just Capture Knowledge – Put It to Work,” Katrina Pugh and Nancy M. Dixon, Harvard
Business Review, May 2008. (This is one page and it is free)
• "Sharing Hidden Know-How," (Journal of Digital Media Management, Vol 1. No. 1,
49-54, May, 2012).
• “Knowledge Jam: Three Disciplines to Beat the Merger Performance Odds,” Ivey
Business Journal, July/August, 2011.
• Jamming with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement “ (NASA Ask Magazine,
Winter, 2011)
• Quick overviews for facilitators :
– Facilitator as catalyst for innovation. (Training Magazine, 2011)
– Talk Trumps Text for Harvesting Hidden Know-How (IT Performance Improvement)
12Tacit Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer