Posted by Matt M on October 16, 2003 at 08:05:11:

In Reply to: Re: posted by Don Mezei on October 15, 2003 at 12:53:41:

Hi Don

Thanks ;-) , was feeling a bit lonely for a while.

Going back to my original post, what did you think of my suggestion that for Tacit knowledge to be produced from Explicit knowledge it requires some additional 'processing' or 'learning' based on that Explicit knowledge and their own understanding of the domain, which is represented by the middle 'K' in your equation?

'tacit knowledge <> K <> explicit knowledge'

What would you say is Tacit and what is Explicit (or a combination of?) in these examples.

1st You say to me "its raining outside", therefore I realise I'll need to wear a coat if I go out.

and

2nd I drive a car reasonably well, and can tell a novice how to drive, but they wouldn't be able to just sit in a car and 'know' how to drive it, although they could tell somebody else how to drive.

Does knowledge have to be either Tacit or Explicit or can it be a combination of both, i.e. on a continuum?

Matt M

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: "birth of knowledge" Don Mezei 17:48:55 10/16/03 (1)
  • Re: "birth of knowledge" Matt M 05:33:28 10/17/03 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Name: 

  E-Mail: 

 Subject: 

Message: