Difference between revisions of "Explicit knowledge"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Monica}} | {{Monica}} | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
{{Csaba}} | {{Csaba}} | ||
Revision as of 12:30, 2 October 2013
Contents
Definition
Explicit knowledge is Knowledge that has been articulated or has already been codified in some form
Summary
It can be codified or non-codified, but articulated and codifiable. There is much discussion about the distinction between information and explicit knowledge, but for practical purposes, here they will be used interchangeably
Description
This knowledge can be readily transferred to others.
The most common forms of codified explicit knowledge are documents, drawings, calculations, icons, designs, multimedia, databases, Knowledge representation (i.e. taxonomies, knowledge maps) documented procedures and manuals.
Non-codified explicit knowledge (i.e., knowledge that is conscious to the knowledge bearer) is for example existing non-documented procedures in an organization
There is much discussion about the distinction between information and explicit knowledge, but for practical purposes of managing these two (similarity of tools and methods), they will be used interchangeably here.
The object can be information or explicit knowledge, depending on the recipient. The next section illustrates this thin boundary.
Illustrative examples
- Expert (rule-based) systems contain information that allow independent person to act upon it - hence it is considered explicit knowledge
- Without an expert, NPP documentation will not allow an independent person to build and run an NPP - hence it is information,
- Power failure in an NPP is information for the general public(meaning: not able to operate), but knowledge for the operators (meaning:danger)
