Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Abdallah Al-Shawabkeh, Alexander K<strong>of</strong>inas and Mike Sharp
Figure 2.1: The cycle <strong>of</strong> knowledge management processes
1.1 KM Implementation Frameworks
As it could be seen to Figure-2-2, Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) articulated <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> knowledge
management within and across corporations, highlighting <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> knowledge management to
innovation. In <strong>the</strong>ir typology, knowledge has two dimensions: explicit and tacit. The former focuses on
codifiable knowledge while <strong>the</strong> latter focuses on bespoke, uncodifiable and personalised knowledge
that are interminably exchanged between individuals and groups to form <strong>the</strong> spiral <strong>of</strong> knowledge
creation. In <strong>the</strong>ir model <strong>the</strong>re are four types <strong>of</strong> knowledge conversion and each is <strong>the</strong> result <strong>of</strong> a
conversion process between <strong>the</strong> tacit/explicit dimensions. According to this model <strong>of</strong> knowledge
creation knowledge shifts from individuals to groups back to individuals, is ceaselessly inter-converted
making <strong>the</strong> management <strong>of</strong> knowledge <strong>the</strong> necessary precondition <strong>of</strong> innovation and innovation itself
is <strong>the</strong> outcome <strong>of</strong> knowledge creation processes (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995).
Figure 2.2: The Spiral <strong>of</strong> Knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995)
Blackler (1995)suggested a more extensive typology where knowledge is embrained, embodied,
encultured, embedded or encoded. Embrained knowledge refers to individual conceptual skills and
cognitive abilities (e.g. ma<strong>the</strong>maticians). Embodied knowledge focuses on those activities <strong>of</strong> an
individual that are <strong>the</strong> result <strong>of</strong> extensive practice. They <strong>of</strong>ten involve physical action (e.g. skilled craft
workers). Encultured knowledge describes <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> shared understanding and is knowledge
that can occur at all levels; groups, organizations and societies. Embedded knowledge here relates to
taken-for-granted routines and interactions that enable shared action on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> a team. Finally
encoded knowledge refers to <strong>the</strong> explicit knowledge representations found in concrete artifacts such
as books, databases and web-sites. Such a view <strong>of</strong> knowledge has similarities to Nonaka et al’s
perspective (1995) and <strong>the</strong>re seem to be some direct links. Encoded knowledge seems similar to
explicit while encultured, and embedded seems to describe <strong>the</strong> processes <strong>of</strong> externalization and
combination in Nonaka & Takeuchi’s framework. Then he goes on to suggest a typology along two
2