Modelling Tacit Knowledge via Questionnaire Data

  • Peter Busch
  • Debbie Richards
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2961)

Abstract

The transfer of tacit knowledge is important in ensuring that an organisations most valuable assets do not walk out the door. While much controversy surrounds the definition of tacit knowledge and whether it can be captured, in this paper we follow a psychological approach based on the work of Sternberg at Yale that seeks to measure tacit knowledge via the capture of responses to work-place scenarios. Focusing on the information technology (IT) work-place, we have developed a tacit knowledge inventory which forms part of a questionnaire given to experts and non-experts in three separate IT organisations. In psychology, descriptive statistics are typically used to analyse the responses. We have chosen a more qualitative and visual approach and have used formal concept analysis (FCA) for data analysis that better suits our small sample size. Using FCA we were able to identify participants that responded similarly to the peer-identified experts. In this way the organisation is alerted to the important role these individuals potentially play.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bartel, H.-G., Brüggemann, R.: Applications of formal concept analysis to structure - activity relationships. Fresenius journal of analytic chemistry 361(1), 1–23 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brockmann, E., Anthony, W.: The influence of tacit knowledge and collective mind on strategic planning. Journal of Managerial Issues Pittsburg (Summer 1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davenport, T., De Long, D., Beers, M.: Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review Winter (from ABI Proquest) (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fleck, J.: Contingent knowledge and technology development. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management December (From ABI Proquest) (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ganter, R., Wille, R.: Formal concept analysis: Mathematical foundations. Springer, Berlin (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kollewe, W.: Evaluation of a survey with methods of formal concept analysis. In: Conceptual and numerical analysis of data: Proceedings of the 13th conference of the Gesellschaft für Klassifikation e. V. University of Augsburg, April 10 - 12, pp. 123–134. Springer, Berlin (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Richards, D., Busch, P.: Measuring, formalising and modeling Tacit Knowledge. In: International Congress on Intelligent Systems and Applications (ISA 2000), December 12 - 15 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scott, J.: Social Network Analysis: A handbook. Sage Publications, London (1991)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spangenberg, N., Wolff, K.E.: Conceptual grid evaluation. In: Spangenberg, N., Wolff, K.E. (eds.) Classification and related methods of data analysis, pp. 577–580. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1988)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Spillane, R.: Stress at work: A review of Australian research Department of Psychology University of Stockholm Report Number 35 (1983)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sternberg, R.: Theory and management of tacit knowledge as a part of practical intelligence. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 203(4), 319–334 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wille, R.: Restructuring lattice theory: an approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In: Ordered Sets, pp. 445–470. Reidel, D, Dordrecht (1982)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wille, R.: Concept lattices and conceptual knowledge. Computers and Mathematics with Applications 23(1992), 493–522 (1992)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Busch
    • 1
  • Debbie Richards
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ComputingMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations