Tacit and Explicit Knowledge

One of the earliest and best known methods to classify knowledge is the discrimination between tacit and explicit knowledge. Polanyi succinctly noted, “We can know more than we can tell”, distinguishing all knowledge as either tacit or explicit. Polanyi proposed all knowledge possesses a tacit dimension difficult to articulate, noting, “We know a person’s face, and can recognize it among a thousand, indeed among a million. Yet we usually cannot tell how we recognize a face we know”.

Opinions diverge on the differentiation between tacit and explicit knowledge. Some contend the categorization of knowledge is not possible because of its holistic nature. It is believed that experience learned from observation (tacit) is more beneficial than other types of experience, such as classroom training (explicit). Tacit knowledge is difficult to articulate and can best be learned by observation. Tacit knowledge is “nonverbalized, or even nonverbalizable, intuitive, unarticulated” . The transfer of tacit knowledge is costly, time consuming, and uncertain and may require repeated exchanges among individuals. Tacit knowledge consists of technical and cognitive aspects. The technical element of tacit knowledge refers to the context-specific and concrete expertise of a particular skill. The cognitive aspect of tacit knowledge refers to the individual’s implicit ingrained mental models.

Successful transfer of tacit knowledge requires an open mind and a close relationship between two parties. A portion of tacit knowledge is not even accessible to the holder of the knowledge because it is impossible to verbalize or share discursively. Tacit knowledge is the information employees possess beyond documented knowledge. Tacit knowledge enables workers to perform at a higher level than does explicit knowledge.