Addis, M (2016) Tacit and explicit knowledge in construction management. Construction Management and Economics, 34(7-8), pp. 439-445. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
In construction, better practice has been sought through the employment of knowledge management. Interest in tacit knowledge has grown due to its importance for raising performance at all organizational levels. Aspects of the limits which tacit knowledge places on knowledge management approaches in construction are considered with the focus being upon broad knowledge management categories rather than the details of particular methods. The distinction between knowing how and knowing that coupled with examination of whether the main mode of knowing is tacit or explicit is used to analyse the relationship between tacit and explicit knowledge in construction. There are significant general theoretical difficulties with incorporating tacit knowledge into the objectivist knowledge management approaches which predominate in construction particularly since methods for converting tacit to explicit knowledge are problematic. Improving performance requires appreciating the limitations of objectivist and practice-based knowledge management within the context of construction projects as the consideration of performance management measures illustrates.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | information management; measurement; project management; tacit knowledge |
| Index terms: | project management, performance management, employment, construction project, knowledge management, tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, professional development, production management, performance measurement, management, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Human Resources, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here