"Unveiling the Dynamics: Navigating Tacit and Explicit Knowledge in Contemporary Contexts"

 

The differentiation between tacit and explicit knowledge stands as a crucial element in the realm of Human Resource Management (HRM), shaping how organizations handle and capitalize on their intellectual assets. Informed by insights from foundational works in HRM literature, this discussion delves into the intricate dimensions of tacit and explicit knowledge, acknowledging their significance in organizational learning, performance, and the strategic utilization of human resources.

In the context of Human Resource Management (HRM), tacit and explicit knowledge refer to two types of knowledge that employees possess within an organization.

1. Tacit Knowledge:

   • Tacit knowledge is the kind of knowledge that is difficult to express or transfer through formal documentation or communication. It is deeply rooted in an individual's experience, insights, and intuition.
   • 
     
   • 
     

2. Explicit Knowledge:

   • Explicit knowledge is formal and codified information that can be easily documented, communicated, and shared. It is tangible and can be expressed in words and numbers.
   • 
     

• • 
    

In HRM, a balance between tacit and explicit knowledge is crucial. While explicit knowledge provides a foundation for standardization and efficiency, tacit knowledge is invaluable for handling unique situations, fostering innovation, and promoting a deeper understanding of human behavior within the workplace. Effective HRM often involves creating mechanisms for capturing, sharing, and leveraging both tacit and explicit knowledge to enhance organizational performance and adaptability.

Tacit knowledge, elucidated by Chen, Liaw, and Lee (2003), refers to the intuitive, experiential, and often unspoken knowledge residing within individuals. Rooted in personal experiences, insights, and understandings, tacit knowledge holds particular relevance in HRM concerning employee skill sets, problem-solving abilities, and innovative capacities (Katou & Budhwar, 2010). Wan-Jing and Tung's (2005) emphasis on the correlation between strategic human resource management and firm performance aligns with the idea that tacit knowledge forms a valuable resource for organizations seeking a competitive advantage through their workforce.

In contrast, explicit knowledge is codified, documented, and easily transferable through formal channels (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Tangible and conveyable through manuals, procedures, databases, and other formalized structures, explicit knowledge is foundational to structured training programs and contributes to the development of a shared understanding of practices and processes within an organization (Chen et al., 2003).

The effective management of tacit and explicit knowledge is pivotal to organizational learning, as highlighted by Boxall and Purcell (2003) in the strategic dimensions of HRM. Aligning human resource practices with broader organizational strategies becomes paramount, wherein tacit knowledge becomes a strategic reservoir that enhances organizational performance and adaptability (Wan-Jing & Tung, 2005).

Moreover, the integration of tacit and explicit knowledge with the psychological contract, as explored by Guest (1991), underscores their impact on the employment relationship. Tacit knowledge contributes to the social and relational aspects of the psychological contract, fostering trust and commitment between employees and the organization. Explicit knowledge plays a role in the contractual and transactional elements, providing a clear framework of expectations and responsibilities.

Nevertheless, challenges emerge in the effective management of tacit and explicit knowledge. Guest and Conway (2004) highlight potential barriers in the dissemination of tacit knowledge, emphasizing the need for an organizational culture that encourages knowledge sharing. Additionally, the limitations of over-relying on explicit knowledge, as discussed by Paauwe (2009), underscore the importance of recognizing the dynamic interplay between tacit and explicit knowledge in fostering a holistic approach to organizational learning.

       References

Chen, Liaw, & Lee. (2003). Using an HRM pattern approach to examine the productivity of manufacturing firms - An empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 24(3), 299–318.

Katou, A. A., & Budhwar, P. S. (2010). Causal relationship between HRM policies and organisational performance: Evidence from the Greek manufacturing sector. European Management Journal, 28(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2009.06.001

Mostafa, A. M., & Gould-Williams, J. S. (2013). Testing the mediation effect of person–organization fit on the relationship between high performance HR practices and employee outcomes in the Egyptian public sector. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(2), 276–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.826917

Onyango, & Okech. (2008). Human Resource Systems in Kenya: A Case Study of Hotel Human Resources Performance. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 1–16.