tacit kowledge

Upload: giovanna-mazzotti

Post on 02-Mar-2016

37 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • The Role ofTacit Knowledgein Group Innovation

    Dorothy LeonardSylvia Sensiper

    I nnovation, the source of sustained advantage for most companies, dependsupon the individual and collertive expertise of employees. Some of thisexpertise is captured and codified in software, hardware, and processes. Yettacit knowledge also underlies many competitive capabilitiesa fact drivenhome to some companies in the wake of aggressive downsizing, when underval-ued knowledge walked out the door.

    The marvelous capacity of the human mind to make sense of a lifetime'scollection of experience and to connect patterns from the past to the present andfuture is, by its very nature, hard to capture. However, it is essential to the inno-vation process. The management of tacit knowledge is relatively unexploredparticularly when compared to the work on explicit knowledge. Moreover,while individual creativity is important, exciting, and even crucial to business,the creativity of groups is equally important. The creation of today's complexsystems of products and services requires the merging of knowledge fromdiverse national, disciplinary, and personal skill-based perspeaives. Innovationwhether it be revealed in new products and services, new processes, or neworganizational formsis rarely an individual undertaking. Creative cooperationis critical.

    We wish to thank Walter Swap. Barbara Feinberg, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpfulcomn'ients and the Harvard Business School Division of Research for supporting this work.

    12 CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40,NO,3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tadt Knowledge in Group innovation

    What isTacit Knowledge?In the business context, we define knowledge as information that is relevant,

    actionable, and based at least partially on experience. Knowledge is a stibset of infor-mation; it is subjective; ii is linked to tneaningful behavior; and it has tacit ele-ments born of experience. Business theorists have, for the sake of convenience,contrasted tacit knowledge with explicit knowledge as if they were distinct cate-gories. J.C. Spender defines tacit knowledge as "not yet explicated."' IkujiroNonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi use this distinction to explain how an interactionbetween the two categories forms a knowledge spiral: explicit knowledge isshared through a combination process and becomes tadt through internaliza-tion; tacit knowledge is shared through a socialization process and becomesexplicit through externalization.

    In this article, we build on Michael Polanyi's original, messier assumption:that all knowledge has tadt dimensions.^ Knowledge exists on a spectrum. Atone extreme it is almost completely tacit, that is, semiconscious and unconsdousknowledge held in peoples' heads and bodies. At the other end of the spectrum,knowledge is almost completely explicit, or codified, structured, and accessibleto people other than the individuals originating it. Most knowledge, of course,exists in between the extremes. Explicit elements are objective, rational, andcreated in the "then and there" while the tacit elements are subjective, experi-ential, and created in the "here and now."'

    Although Spender notes that "tadt does not mean knowledge that cannotbe codified,"'' some dimensions of knowledge are unlikely ever to be whollyexplicated, whether embedded in cognition or in physical abilities. Semicon-sdous or unconscious tacit knowledge produces insight, intuition, and decisionsbased on "gut feel." For example, the coordination and motor skills to run alarge crane are largely tacit, as are the negotiation skills required in a corporatemeeting or the artistic vision embodied in the design of a new computer pro-gram interface. The common element in such knowing is the inability of theknower to totally articulate all that he or she knows. Tacit knowing that isembodied in physical skills resides in the body's muscles, nerves, and reflexesand is learned through practice, i.e., through trial and error. Tacit knowingembodied in cognitive skills is likewise learned through experience and residesin the unconscious or semiconsdous. While Polanyi addressed tacit knowledgeat an individual level, others have suggested it exists in group settings, hi fact,Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter suggest that organizations maintain theirstructure and coherency through tadt knowledge embedded in "organizationalroutines" that no single person understands completely'

    Much knowledge remains tacit for various reasons. Perhaps its explicationwould not be beneficial. Unless an incentive is created, there is little reason foran individual or group possessing tacit knowledge that provides an importantcompetitive advantage to explicate "away" that advantage. More commonly,however, people are unaware of the tacit dimensions of their knowledge, or

    CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40, NO. 3 SPRING 1998 113

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    arc unable to articulate them. Spender notes various types of "automatic knowl-edge," such as skilled use of tools (e.g., a computer keyboard) or instinctive reac-tions (e.g., catching a falling object) or "action slips," as when one starts outto drive on an errand and ends up at the office instead.^ In all these cases, thephysical and mental reflexes operate without conscious direction (or withoutwhat Polanyi termed "focal" awareness.)

    Moreover, as psychological research has demonstrated, the acquisition ofknowledge can occur through non-conscious processes, through "implicit learn-ing."' That is, we can acquire knowledge and an understanding of how to navi-gate our environment "independently of conscious attempts to do so."** Oneintriguing implication is that not only can we "know more than we can tell,"'but we often know more than we realize. Furthermore, our efforts to rationalizeand explain non-conscious behavior may be futile, if not counterproductive."Knowledge acquired from implicit learning procedures is knowledge that, insome raw fashion, is always ahead of the capability of its possessor to explicateit."' Researchers stimulating implicit learning found, in fact, that forcing Indi-viduals to describe what they thought they understood about implicitly learnedprocesses often resulted in poorer performance than if the individuals wereallowed to utilize their tacit knowledge without explicit explanation."

    Studies on creativity, intuition, and non-analytical behavior suggest threeways that tacit knowledge potentially is exercised in the service of innovation.We speculate that they represent a hierarchy of increasingly radical departuresfrom the obvious and the expected, and therefore are of increasing value toinnovative efforts.

    Problem SolvingThe most common application of tacit knowledge is to problem solving.

    Herbert Simon has argued that the reason experts on a given subject can solvea problem more readily than novices is that the experts have in mind a patternborn of experience, which they can overlay on a particular problem and use toquickly detect a solution. "The expert recognizes not only the situation in whichhe finds himself, but also what action might be appropriate for dealing with it."'^Others writing on the topic note that "intuition may be most usefully viewed asa form of unconscious pattern-matching cognition."'^ "Only those matches thatmeet certain criteria enter consciousness."'"* "

    Problem FindingA second application of tacit knowledge is to the framing of problems.

    Some authors distinguish between problem finding and problem solving: linkingthe latter to "a relatively clearly formulated problem" within an accepted para-digm and the former, which "confronts the person with a general sense of intel-lectual or existential unease" about the way the problem is being considered,'"to more radical innovation. Creative problem framing allows the rejection ofthe *obvious'' or usual answer to a problem in favor of asking a wholly different

    14 CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    question. "Intuitive discovery is often not simply an answer to the specificproblem but is an insight into the real nature of the dilemma."'^ Consultantsare familiar with the situation in which a client identifies a problem and setsout specifications for its solution, whereas the real value for the client may liein reformulating the problem. Of course, the more that the consultant's uneasewith the current formulation derives from his or her semiconscious or uncon-scious knowledge, the more difficult it is to express and rationalize.

    Prediction and AnticipationFinally, the deep study of phenomena seems to provide an understand-

    ing, only partially conscious, of how something works, allowing an individualto anticipate and predict occurrences that are then subsequently explored veryconsciously. Histories of important scientific discoveries suggest that this kind ofanticipation and reliance on inexplicable mental processes can be very importantin invention. In stories about prominent scientists, there are frequent referencesto the "hunches" that occur to the prepared mind, sometimes in dreams, as inthe case of Watson and Crick's formulation of the double helix. Authors writingabout the stages of creative thought often refer to the preparation and incuba-tion that precede flashes of insight. "Darwin prepared himself for his insightsinto evolution through a childhood interest in collecting insects, the readingof geology, and the painstaking observations he made during the voyage of the

    Similarly, literature on nursing is full of references to the importance oflistening to intuition and hunches in caring for patients. For example, the med-ical team at Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis was able to revive a three-yearold boy in respiratory distress because his nurse listened to her "insistent innervoice" and checked on the patientdespite the fact that "logically" nothingshould be wrong.'^

    As these examples suggest, much of the research on tacit knowledgefocuses on the individualperhaps because most investigators are psychologists,for whom the single mind is of primary interest, or perhaps because writers canalways probe their own experience for data. For similar reasons, the literatureon creativity likewise highlights individual expressions of innovativeness. How-ever, as previously noted, innovation in business is usually a group process.Therefore, we need to examine more closely both tadt knowing and creativityas they are expressed by members of groupssingly and collectively.

    Creativity and Social InteractionCreative ideas do not arise spontaneously from the air but are bom out of

    conscious, semiconscious, and unconscious mental sorting, grouping, matching,and melding. Moreover, interpersonal interactions at the conscious level stimu-late and enhance these activities; interplay among individuals appears essentialto the innovation process. In some businessesnotably advertising, games, and

    CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40, NO, 3 SPRING 1998 115

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    entertainment"the creatives" or "the talent" are separated from the rest of thecorporation because it is assumed that creativity and innovation bloom in isola-tion. However, even in businesses where "creatives" have held elite positionsfor years, some managers are beginning to question why all employees cannotcontribute to innovation. One manager in a toy manufacturing company com-plained that in a recent meeting with 20 people, "nineteen thought they didn'tneed to be creative."

    Studies of people selected because of individually demonstrated creativityrefer consistently to their interactions with others as an essential element intheir process. One study elidted comments such as: "I develop a lot of my ideasin dialogue,"^" or "it's only by interacting with other people in the building thatyou get anything interesting done; it's essentially a communal enterprise."^' Theauthors of this particular study conclude that "even in the most solitary, privatemomentthe moment of insight itselfmany creative individuals are aware ofthe deeply social nature of their creative process."'''

    This sodal interaaion is espedally critical for teams of individuals respon-sible for delivering new products, services, and organizational processes. Beforeturning to a discussion of how tacit knowledge is utilized by such groups, wepresent a brief description of the innovation process.

    The Nature of Innovation

    The process of innovation is a rhythm of search and selection, explorationand synthesis, cycles of divergent thinking followed by convergence. At thehighest level of abstraction, innovation is often presented as linear: idea genera-tion is followed by development, then by adoption or testing, and finally byimplementation or after-sales service. However, within this overall pattern, thestages of idea generation through implementation recur at a smaller scale ateach step (see Figure 1). The innovation pattern thus occurs as fractals, withsmall decision cycles embedded in larger, but very similarly structured ones, andwith individual choices made within the confines of a hierarchy of prior, largerscope individual or group choices.^*

    The process by which a group or individual first creates options and thenchooses one on which to focus efforts occurs during the testing and implementa-tion stages as well as during idea generation and development. Thus creativegroup activity is not confined to the initial stages of the overall innovative effortbut in fart is essential to such downstream artivities as launching a new product,implementing a new compensation system in an organization, or improvingafter-sales service to customers. At any point in an innovation process, then,managers need to manage both the expansion of thought that gives rise topotentially creative alternatives and the homing in on a viable option. Tacitknowledge has in important role in both stimulating the "requisite variety" ofideas and then in the convergence that permits focus on artionable next

    116 CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40,NO.3 SPRING 1998

  • The Roie of Tacit Knowledge in Graup Innovation

    F I G U R E 1 . The innovation Funnel*: Incremental Cycles

    Diverge

    Converge

    ooooShip or Sales or

    Testing Adopt Implementation

    IdeaGeneration

    DevelopmentAfter Sales Service/

    Continuous Improvement

    EJased partially on "The Developmental Funnd" in WheeWight and Dark. Revo/utwiing Produa Deve/opment. 1992.

    DivergenceOne definition of creative synthesis (which underlies the development of

    many new products, services, or ways of organizing) is the "interlocking of twopreviously unrelated skills, or matrices of thought."^^ However, research suggeststhat deep skill takes at least a decade to develop.^* Therefore, while a particularlytalented or ambitious individual may develop deep skills in two or more arenas,most of us will build a single bank of expertise in our lifetimes. This expertiseaccrues as we experience education, work, and life in general." '^

    In working groups, individuals from different backgrounds (cultures,organizational experience, disciplinary training, preferred cognitive styles) drawupon their pools of tacit, as well as explicit knowledge, to contribute. In fact, it isthe tacit dimensions of their knowledge bases that make such individuals espe-dally valuable contributors to group projects; perspectives based on such knowl-edge cannot be obtained any other way except through interaction. Inaccessiblefrom written documents or explicit expositions, tacit knowledge is proteaedfrom competitors unless key individuals leave or are hired away. Moreover, evenindividuals' explicit statements or suggestions carry with them the weight ofunspoken knowledgemental models, life examples, perhaps physical skills,even unrecognized patterns of experience which people draw upon to increasethe wealth of possible solutions to a problem. This experience, stored as tacil

    CAUFOFysllA MANAGEMENT REVIEVS/ VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998 117

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    knowledge, often reaches consciousness in the form of insights, intuitions, andflashes of inspiration.

    When a group of diverse individuals addresses a common challenge, eachskilled person frames both the problem and its solution by applying mental sche-mata and patterns he or she understands best. The result is a cacophony of per-spectives. In a well-managed development process, these varying perspectivesfoster creative abrasion, intelleaual conflict between diverse viewpoints producingenergy that is channeled into new ideas and products.^"

    The creation of such intellectual ferment is important to innovation for anumber of reasons. First, the more options offered (up to a point, of course), themore likely that a frame-breaking perspective will be available for selection. Acertain "requisite variety' is desirable for innovation.^^ Moreover, experimentalresearch has demonstrated that a minority opinion offered during group decisionmaking stimulates more innovative solutions to problemseven if the ultimateselection was not one specifically proposed from a minority viewpoint.*" Appar-ently, just hearing a very different perspective challenges the mindset of thosein the majority sufficiently that they will search beyond what initially appears tobe an obvious solution. This may be one reason that intellectually heterogeneousgroups are more innovative than homogeneous ones." As a recent review ofdifferent types of group diversity concludes, "the diversity of information Ithat]functionally dissimilar individuals bring to the group improves performance interms of creativity."" If all individuals in the group approach a task with highlyoverlapping experiential backgrounds, they may be subject to "groupthink," i.e.,a comfortable common viewpoint leading to closed-mindedness and pressurestowards uniformity." Their tacit as well as their explicit knowledge is similarenough that they neither produce a wide variety of options nor expend mucheffort on searching.

    A popular technique for capitalizing on the respective insights and intu-itions of a group of individuals is to conduct a brainstorming session.'" At IDEO,an international product development firm, brainstorming sessions occur at cru-cial stages in the product development process and have been shown to lead toimportant consequences for the organization as a whole.

    An IDEO "brainstorm" gathers together a set of staff with diverse skills-human faaors, mechanical engineering, and industrial designto generateproduct design ideas, often in tandem with the client. The meeting is run by afacilitator and is always held face-to-face. The "rules" are well-known to IDEOdesigners but are posted visibly: defer judgment; build on the ideas of others;one conversation at a time; stay focused on the topic; and encourage wild ideas.All concepts and ideas elicited during a brainstorming session are recorded on awhite board. The principal way that participants share their tacit knowledge isthrough sketching designs or through visual analogies. For example, an idea foran ajipliance hinge might be derived from the way in which a boat rudder ismaneuvered. Because the IDEO employees share a deep understanding ofprocess, they are generally comfortable both with the highly divergent thinking

    18 CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    encouraged in the brainstorming itself and with the vagueness of the initialsketches and analogies as modes of communication. IDEO managers find thattheir clients tend to underestimate the power of brainstormingthat is, untilthey have experienced it. Then they are likely to walk away impressed with theprofusion of ideas presented.

    We may have no choice about managing divergent viewpoints in thecreation of today's complex systems of products and services. In a 1992 studyof three product lines (cellular phones, optical fiber systems, and refrigerators),Ove Granstrand and others found that the number of technologies and discipli-nary bases required to produce these products increased between each succes-sive product generation. For example, the first generation of cellular phones inthe early 1980s, required only electrical engineering skills. By the mid-1990s,the third generation of these phones called for a knowledge of physics as wellas electrical, mechanical, and computer engineering.**^

    As if the proliferation in requirements for different types of expertisewere not sufficient, the design of global products today also demands a sensi-tivity to diverse norms and attitudes. Innovation knows no national bounds.When San Diego, California-based Nissan Design International designers werewrestling with the configuration of the Infiniti J-30, they discovered that theirJapanese colleagues were far more sensitive to the front-end or "face" of thecar than they, although translating the Japanese tacit knowledge about con-sumer preferences into information explicit enough for communication (mostlythrough sketches) took some time and a lot of effort. At last the California-baseddesigners came to understand that the proposed design of a slightly down-turned grill and narrow headlights gave the car's persona a sour appearanceto the Japanese designers, reducing its appeal. Very slight adjustmentsalmostindiscernible to the American designersraised the design to "a higher level ofcultural intelligence," noted NDI President Gerald Hirshberg.*^

    Perspectives at a group level can also be brought into juxtaposition so asto increase divergent thinking. John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid point outthat when large organizations are conceived as "a collective of communities"with each community having a particular culture and viewpoint, "separate com-munity perspectives can be amplified by interchanges . . . Out of this friaion ofcompeting ideas can come the sort of improvisational sparks necessary for ignit-ing organizational innovation.""

    Whether we seek to increase the divergence of perspectives as a deliber-ate strategy for innovation or have the diversity thrust upon us as a necessity,we need to manage that rich profusion.^ ** Much of the richness derives fromthe tadt dimensions of the knowledge possessed by individuals in the group.Although diverse explicit knowledge is challenging to harness and direct towardsa common goal, it is easier to generate, analyze, and share than is tacitknowledge.

    CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40, NO. 3 SPRING 1998 119

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    ConvergenceAt every stage, innovation requires solution, convergence upon accept-

    able actionand again, tacit knowledge plays an important role. The process ofinnovation has a tremendous effect on the integrity and the system integrationof any resultant product or service." In turn, the aggregate knowledge of projectmembers involved in the innovation process has to be coordinated and focused.The degree to which knowledge needs to be actually shared depends upon thenature of the innovation task and how much interdependency exists amongsubgroups or individuals. Again confining the discussion here to managing thetacit dimensions of knowledge, we suggest that three different types of tacitknowledge need to be managed: overlapping specific, collective, and guiding. Thesethree form a rough hierarchy from low to high in terms of abstraaion.

    Overlapping Specific KnowledgeGroups or subgroups of individuals involved in an innovation project

    may build up shared specific knowledge at the interfaces between themas, forexample, of client preferences and attitudes or of particular steps in a productionprocess. This knowledge is overlapping in that only part of each individual's tacitknowledge about the undertaking is sharedthat which is essential to the com-pletion of their interdependent tasks. The mechanisms for creating the tacitdimensions of such colleaive knowledge include shared experiences andapprenticeships.

    Observational visitsto customers, to customers' customers, or to poten-tial users of the general class of a given service or product produced by an orga-nizationcan stimulate innovative ideas.**' Such "empathic design" expeditionsare essentially anthropological in nature. A multifunaional team of individualswho carry with them an acute understanding of their organization's capabilitiesare directly exposed to the world of potential users and observe how those usersinteract with their environment. This observation identifies needs about whichthe users may be unaware and/or are unlikely to articulate. Although theempathic design team members return from the field with very different percep-tions (and that, in fact, is the value of sending diverse observers), their observa-tions overlap to create some commonto some degree tacitunderstanding ofthe environment for which they are designing. Individuals from teams that haveconducted such anthropological expeditions can explicate some of their observa-tions about the work or home life of those observed, but clearly more knowl-edge is siiared than can be expressed. So, for instance, members' commentsabout "the pace of work" or the "sporadic communication" are laden with tacitunderstanding. Such phrases call up specific mental images of routines aroundthe office, household, or factory that are inaccessible to someone who has notshared visits to those same sites.

    Apprenticeships are a time-honored way of building shared specific tacitknowledge. Although today most production processes are moved as rapidly aspossible from art towards science, even in quite sophisticated processes, some art

    120 CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40,NO.3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    often remains.^' A decade ago, a study of the transmission of hybridoma tech-nology revealed that "the unsaid is indeed a part of conscious scientific prac-tice."''^ The researchers found that the production of monoclonal antibodieswas an artisanal technique. Manuals purporting to instruct in the methodologyexplicitly recognized the need for apprenticeship:

    The newcomer lo hybridization is well advised to learn the technique in a labora-tory which is already practicing fusion . . . newcomers to the techniqtie arc rela-tively unsuccessful initially and obtain many hybrids alter some practice, althoughan experienced observer cannot see any difference between the technique usedon the first day and in subsequent, successful experiments. The best approach istherefore to learn from an experienced laboratory and practice until hybrids areobtained."

    Researchers engaged in the production of the hybridomas talked aboutgetting "a feeling for just what the cells are doing, and how healthy they are bylooking at them" and reported gaining that understanding by association withexperienced individuals. "The professor says: these are healthy, those are not.You learn by association, without knowing what you are looking at."'*'' In suchan apprenticeship, much explicit knowledge is conveyed from expert to novice,but tacit knowledge grows through shared observation and from mimickingbehavior, even without knowing why.

    The newer such technologies are to the world, the more importantapprentices are to the innovation process. The faster the innovation cycle,the less likely that knowledge will be captured explicitly. The director of anadvanced development group commented that his researchers were likely tobe "stuck for life" with a technology they created because the knowledge basemoves so fast it is never totally captured in any explicit form. Once responsiblefor a given technology, the researchers remain the key repository for not onlythe original concepts, but for undocumented refinements of the technologymade by downstream recipients. Of course, observers may aver that all aspectsof the technology should be captured explicitly, but as the pace of innovationaccelerates, such capture is increasingly difficult. Not only has knowledge notprogressed to the point of easy codification (i.e., the process is still an art), buttadt knowledge that is a prerequisite to exploiting the technology can constitutea competitive advantage.

    Collective: System KnowledgeCollective tacit knowledge is developed communally, over time, in inter-

    actions among individuals in the group. It exists more or less complete in thehead of each group member who has been completely socialized into the group.One form of collective tacit knowledge encompasses the entire production sys-tem, allowing individuals to contribute to innovation without explicit commu-nication because they understand at a systemic level how all the individualoperations in an organization fit together. The more that tacit knowledge aboutoperations is diffused and shared, the harder is imitation. This is why companies

    CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40, NO, 3 SPRING 1998 121

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    such as Chaparral Steel or Oticon invite competitors to visit and observe, con-vinced that no one could imitate their success from absorbing explicit knowl-edge.'*^ Even if some individuals leave the organization, a shared "net ofexpectations" created through organizational routines and accepted standardsremains."*^ Moreover, these expectations are conveyed through artifacts as wellas through behavior. Thus, for instance, in any design shop, one sees modelsand prototypes embodying tacit knowledge about successful and unsuccessfulattempts at innovation.

    "Taken-for-granted" collective tadt knowledge often appears in the formof unconscious norms; individuals draw on it unawares. Members of a "commu-nity of practice" develop implicit ways of working and learning together.""^Researchers at the Institute for Research on Learning noted in one study a par-ticular norm of behavior that aided informal communication: they called it"storking," the practice of sticking one's head up over the office cubicle to querysomeone in a nearby cubicle.''^ Adding a few inches to the cubicles could haveprovided more privacybut would have interfered with the behavioral normsof the group. While such "communities" often go unnoticed, much workdepends on their informal, shared use of "non-canonical" practices,**^ that is,norms of behavior and activities that are unacknowledged by the larger organi-zation. According to John Challenger (executive vice president of Challenger,Gray & Christmas, a Chicago-based consultancy) this kind of colleaive tacitknowledge is essential to how people communicate and, by extension, howthey innovate. He claims that down-sizing presents a particular risk for "com-pany Alzheimer's." A firm's success depends not only on the skills and knowl-edge at any given point in time, but on "memories," the intangibles of collectivebusiness experience, triumphs and failures, culture and vision.^"

    Perhaps the purest form of collective tacit knowledge is that possessedby a team or group whose process is the produrt." Their individual knowledgebases are complementary but have to be shared and merged for innovation tooccur. An orchestra or a sports team that plays so far beyond the ordinary thattheir performance constitutes an act of innovation, harnesses their individualtacit knowledge to serve a shared mental model of perfection." Such groups ofpeople (including business teams) feel bonds of shared accomplishment that areinexpressible except in exultation and excitement in the mutual achievement.Together they have created something that no one of them (or even the groupof them, absent this collective tacit knowledge) could havebut that is never-theless dependent upon their individual contributions.

    Guiding Tacit KnowledgeThe more innovative the new product, process, service, or organizational

    form, the less likely that the objectives have been spelled out in detailed specifi-cations, simply because it is more difficult to anticipate all needs and possibleinteractions in a radically new product or process. Individuals creating andimplementing an innovation need to exercise judgment and make dozens of

    122 CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in GnDup Innovation

    decisions on their own initiative about how to reach the agreed-upon objectives.Lacking guidance, individuals may rely on their own ideas about the new prod-uct or process when making a particular decision, and their efforts may go inmany disparate directions. The group must be guided by an understanding ofpurpose that extends beyond explicitly stated goals.'^ Such a vision or productconcept keeps the school of fish swimming in the same direction, as it were.

    Although such guiding visions must of course be explicit, they are oftenhighly metaphorical or presented at a high level of abstraction, so that much oftheir significance is tacitly understood. Ford Motor Company used the phrase"contemporary luxury" to rally their hundreds of diversely skilled developmenttroupes around a central concept for the 1988 design of the Lincoln Continental.The word "contemporary" helped to distinguish their design from the boxy, largeimages associated with past conceptions of luxury cars.'* Nonaka and Takeuchirecount how Honda project team leader HLroo Watanabe coined the phrase"Automobile Evolution" to inspire his designers, and the team continued themetaphorical conceptualization with the product concept "Tall Boy." The processresulted in the revolutionary Honda City, a car that was both "tall" in height and"short" in length.''

    A guiding concept need not be expressed in words to be powerful inaligning individuals during innovation. A group symbol or logo often carriessignificance far beyond the visible. Moreover, creative research on "totemics"has revealed the power of aesthetics to tap into coUeaive tacit knowledge.Angela Dumas uses "visual, object-based metaphors" to help new product devel-opers converge on a general image for a line of products. The team membersfind common aesthetic and functional attributesa similar "feel"in an other-wise disparate group of objects, e.g., paintings, furniture, wine glasses. Theresulting "totem" helps coordinate design decisions,"

    Barriers to Generating and Sharing Tacit KnowledgeWere the process of eliciting and managing the flow of the tacit dimen-

    sions of knowledge easy, innovation would still not occur effortlesslybut itwould be much less of a challenge. Multiple barriers exist both to the stimula-tion of divergent thinking and then to the coalescence of that thinking arounda common aim.

    Obviously, if individuals who possess tadt knowledge important tothe innovation are either actively discouraged from participating or censorthemselves, none of the benefits suggested above can be realized. Individualsrewarded for hoarding their tacit knowledge will do so. In organizations whereexpertise is highly regarded, but mentoring and assisting others is not, rationalpeople may be unlikely to surrender the power they gain from being an impor-tant knowledge sourceespecially since sharing tacit knowledge requires timedevoted to personal contact.

    CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40, NO. 3 SPRING 1998 123

  • The Role of Tadt Knowledge in Group Innovation

    Inequality in status among participants is also a strong inhibitor to shar-ing, especially when exacerbated by different frameworks for assessing informa-tion. Nurses often hesitate to suggest patient treatments to physicians, not onlybecause the doctors have higher status, but because the nurses base their diag-noses on different knowledge bases. Dr. Richard Bohmer has speculated thatnurses' ability to assess a patient is based on observation over time, i.e., longitu-dinal data gathered from standing by a patient's bedside. In contrast, a physicianmakes a judgment based on cross-sectional data, such as blood tests, ultrasoundresults, and x-rays." Thus, the nurses' intuition about a situation draws on verydifferent tacit knowledge, and they have neither the laboratory data to back uphunches nor the status to insist on the validity of their perspective.

    Distance (both physical separation and time) renders sharing the tacitdimensions of knowledge difficult. Although technology may offer a partialsolution, much knowledge is generated and transferred through body language,physical demonstrations of skill, or two- and three-dimensional prototypes thatcan be interaaively shaped by a group of people. Howard Gardner has suggesteda number of "intelligences," beyond the usual ones tested, that are more difficultto express over distances: spatial, kinesthetic, and interpersonal.'" Furthermore,although research is scanty on the topic, a certain level of personal intimacy maybe necessary to establish comfortable communication of tacit knowledge. Inter-net-based friendships suggest that intimacy does not depend wholly on physicalco-location, but it remains to be seen whether such friendships are basedenough in reality to mimic the mutual understanding born of face-to-faceencounters.

    All of these barriers operate against the generation and sharing of theexplicit as well as the tacit dimensions of knowledge. Some barriers, however,specifically inhibit the growth and transfer of tacit dimensions. First, workinggroups often exhibit a strong preference for a particular type of communicationmost often {at least in most business situations) communication that is logical,rational, and based on "hard" data. As numerous studies of thinking styles haveshown, individuals have strong thinking style preferencesfor particular typesof information"hard-wired" into their brains and reinforced over years ofpractices and self-selection into certain careers.'" Even if an individual couldmake some of the tacit dimensions of his or her knowledge explicit in ihe formof a physical demonstration or a drawing, such information would rarely begiven a hearing because such evidence is not regarded in most business settingsas relevant or useful unless backed up with analysis. Imagine how difficult it isin the ordinary product development meeting to introduce relatively inarticulatepreferences that are based on largely tacit knowledge. As Microsoft's Tom Cord-dry noted about the design of new multimedia products, computer programmersnever offer a suggestion about a product feature without telling you the ratio-nale. In contrast, a visually talented artist may offer several drawn options fora screen design, "tell you which one they likeand stop!"''" Artists find itextremely difficult to explain just why a particular pattern, rhythm, or color

    124 CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO, 3 SPRING 1998

  • TTne Role of Tacit Knovs^ edge in Group Innovation

    is preferable in a product design. In many companies, only the top managersdare express a preference without data to back it up. The point is not that suchunarticulated preferences, opinions, and tastes are always correct, rather that themore diverse a collection of viewpoints shared, the more likely that the eventualsolution will challenge the status quo.

    Individuals possessing deep knowledge may also fear trying to expressthe inexpressibleand failing. "No one," they may reason, "can appreciate theexperience I bring to this problem; therefore, I will appear foolish and this istoo high a price to pay." Operators in factories and plants sometimes hesitate toexplain their apparently uncanny ability to foretell when a piece of equipmentis about to fail. A lime kiln operator once interrupted an interview to hurry off,exclaiming simply "something is wrong; she | the kiln] doesn't sound right."Later pressed to explain, he could notor would notexplicate further whatsound he heard the revolving kiln make that caused him to hasten to makeadjustments. "It's nothing scientific," he said somewhat defensively. "Nothingan engineer would believe. I just know."*'

    Yet another barrier of special importance to managing tacit knowledgeis the uneasiness of the group members that their colleagues will draw uponlife experiences to express emotional rather than intellectual disagreement.For abrasion to be creative, it must be impersonal. After a review of relevantresearch. Lisa Hope Pelled suggests that group diversity based upon highly visibledifferences (gender, race, age) leads to more emotion-based disagreements,while more subtle forms of diversity (educational background, personality)are more likely to lead to intellectual disagreements.^^ This model suggests thatthe more that diversity in tadt knowledge is sought from individuals selectedbecause of readily observable differences, the more difficult it becomes to ensurethat the tacit knowledge is heard, is valued, and is targeted towards theinnovation.

    Managerial Implications

    The value of tacit knowledge to the firm has been demonstrated.*'Although it is much easier to stimulate, combine, and communicate the explicitdimensions of knowledge than the tacit, there are numerous situations in whichtadt knowledge cannot or will not be wholly converted into explidt. Managingtacit knowledge is thus a significant challenge in the business worldand itrequires more than mere awareness of the barriers.

    The above descriptions of tadt knowledge in divergent and convergentprocesses suggest some mechanisms by which such knowledge is created andtapped. Brainstorming aids in divergent thinking if participants are encouragedto make suggestions on the basis of intuition and insightas well as analysisand to convey their suggestions through drawings and analogies. However,much divergent thinking occurs naturally, just because individuals approacha task from such different experience bases. The more radical the desired

    CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40.NO.3 SPRING 1998 125

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    departure from status quo, the more fruitful it is to solicit discussion by indi-viduals from varied intellectual perspectives. Managers thus can calibrate thelevel of divergent thinking that they encourage by varying the number and dis-parity of tacit knowledge bases brought to bear on the task. However, they mustmanage the ensuing tendency towards chaos and keep the abrasion creative bydepersonalizing conflict.^ "^

    Managers can also use tacit knowledge to aid convergent thinking, bycreating guiding visions and concepts for groups involved in innovation. Collec-tive tacit knowledge is created through shared experiences such as trips to cus-tomer sites and deliberate apprenticeships. Some degree of natural convergenceoccurs in so-called "communities of practice," in which unconscious work normsguide much of the interactions among members. Managers interrupt these tacitwork practices at their peril, and savvy managers may make good use of themin the service of innovation.

    Many of the barriers to the sharing of tacit knowledge are the same onesthat inhibit innovation in general: hierarchies that implicitly assume wisdomaccrues to those with the most impressive organizational titles; such strong pref-erences for analysis over intuition that no one dares offer an idea without "hardfacts" to back it up; and penalties for failure that discourage experimentation.Managers thus can encourage the full exploitation of tacit knowledge by payingattention to the environment they are creating, by encouraging respect for dif-ferent thinking styles, by understanding the distinction between intelligent fail-ures and stupid mistakes, and by allowing their employees to "fail forward"where appropriate.

    Not all tadt knowing is valuable or even accurate. Although we maynot be able to judge the knowledge itself, we can certainly see the results of theknowledge (just as in astronomy we deduce the presence of a black hole or evena distant planet by its effects on other bodies.) The effect of tacit knowledgeembodied in physical skills is especially visible. In any operation, different indi-viduals using the exact same machinery may produce very different output, justas skiers or tennis players vary in performance using the same equipment. Newoperators in a factory are often assigned to watch particularly skilled workers soas to absorb tacit knowledge. More cognitively based skills can also be modeled.At American Management Systems, junior consultants in the OrganizationalDevelopment and Change Management practice work alongside and arecoached by "shadow consultants," more experienced senior consultants withyears of experience. As one junior consultant said, "the hardest thing aboutorganizational development is that people have to have their own experiencesto really understand it. They have to begin to embody the processes."*'

    Cognitive skills are also open to assessment, as individuals and teams arejudged by tbeir "track record" of performance. Organizations hire individualsand groups not for their explicitly expressed knowledge alone, but for theiranticipated overall impaa on the performance of the organization. Such people

    126 CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40.NO.3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tadt Knowledge in Gnaup Innovation

    often have a reputation for being "good managers" or "creative artists," muchof which derives from the tacit dimensions of their knowledge.

    Managers may also implicitly judge the value of tacit knowing by assess-ing individuals' abilities to communicate some of the tadt dimensions to theirknowledgethrough prototyping, drawing, demonstrating, expressing ideasthrough metaphors and analogies, or mentoring in general. At a Californiacompany producing video games, the manager in charge of product develop-ment values individuals he calls "Gepettos" (named after Pinocchio's famouspuppeteer "father") because of their ability to develop other talent and to instillsome of their own tacit knowledge in new employees through informal appren-ticeships. Managers who wish to encourage this kind of diffusion of tacit knowl-edge set up systems that encourage, enable, and reward the disseminators.

    Tacit knowledge, like all knowledge, can become outdated. By the timethe obsolescence is obvious and proven, the organization will be in trouble.Therefore, one reason that managers import diverse perspertives is to serve asa check on the application of tacit knowledge to current innovation. The morerapidly moving the knowledge base involved, the more critical it is to bring peo-ple in from outside the groupeither as new hires or as visitors.

    Conclusion

    Tacit knowledge is a tremendous resource for all activitiesespecially forinnovation. The tacit dimensions of individual knowledge are not publicly avail-able except as embodied in people to be hired, and the tacit dimensions of collec-tive knowledge are woven into the very fabric of an organization and are noteasily imitated. Therefore, tacit knowledge is a source of competitive advantage.The creativity necessary for innovation derives not only from obvious and visibleexpertise, but from invisible reservoirs of experience.

    Our understanding of tacit knowledge and its relevance to innovation isnascent. This article presents the barest outlines of a path towards that under-standing but may serve to instigate more discussion. Clearly, many differentfields of inquiry are relevant, including ones as diverse as design, cognitive psy-chology, group dynamics, and information technology In order to understandthe potential and complexity of collective tacit knowledge, we shall need topractice what we studyinteracting through metaphor as well as analysis andthrough mutual apprenticeship as well as structured intellectual exchanges. Weshall have to confront in the field of business the deficate, imposing task knownbest to poets and artistsexpressing enough of the inexpressible that the com-munication effort becomes invaluable.

    Notes1. J.C. Spender, "Competitive Advantage from Tacit Knowledge? Unpacking

    the Concept and its Strategic Implications," in Bertrand Mosingeon and Amy

    GAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998 127

  • Tbe Role of Tadt Knowledge in GnDup innovation

    Edmondson, eds.. Organizational Leaming and Competitive Advantage (London: SagePublications 1996), pp. 56-73, 58.

    2. Michael Polanyi, The Tacit Dimension (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1966), p. 4.3. Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi, The Knowledge Creating Company (New

    York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 6L4. Spender, op. cit., p. 58.3. Richard R. Nelson and Sidney G. Winter, An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change

    {Cambridge and London: Tbe BelKnap Press of Harvard University Press, 1982)6. Spender, op. cit.7. Arthur. S. Reber, 'Implicit Learning and Tadt Knowledge," Joumal of Experimental

    Psychology. 118 (1989): 219-235.8. Reber, op. cit., p. 219.9. Polanyi, op. cit., p. 4.

    10. Reber, op. cit., p. 229.11. Much depends, apparently, upon whether ihc underlying struaure is in fact read-

    ily accessible, as participants in the experiments deduced incorrect rules from theirimpliciiiy learned skills. "Looking for rules will not work if you cannot find them,"Reber notes. Furthermore, explicit instructions apparently aid learning only inso-far as they match the person's idiosyncratic implicit learning siruaure. Reber, op.dt., p. 223.

    12. Simon, op. dt., p. 106. Interestingly, when Simon first proposed this concept ofexpertise, he used as an example the ability of a chess professional to determinea good move after only a lew seconds of deliberation because the grandmaster'smemory bolds innumerable patterns of chess plays and the inherent dangers andbenefits assodated wilh the various configurations. The recent matcb betweenGary Kasparov and an IBM computer demonstrated that when all relevant pat-terns can be codified, a computer can sort even more effidently than the bumanbrain. For certain kinds of bounded problems, with known rules, explicit knowl-edge may be more important than implidt.

    13. Allan D. Rosenblatt and James T. Thickslun, 'Intuition and Consdousness,"Psychoanalytic Quarterly. 63

  • The Rote of Tacrt Knowledge in Group Innovation

    17. Debbie A. Shirley and Janice Langan-Pox, "Intuition: A Review of the Literature'Psychological Reports, 79 (1996): 563-584, 568.

    18. Csikszenimihalyi and Sawyer, op. cit., pp. 539-340.19. Lynn Rew, "Nursing Intuition: Too Powerful and Too Valuable to Ignore," Nursing

    (July 1987), pp. 43-45.20. Csikszenimihalyi and Sawyer, op.cit., p. 342.21. Csikszenunihalyi and Sawyer, op.cit., p. 347.22. Csikszentmihalyi and Sawyer, op.cit., p. 349.23. See Kim Clark, "The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and Market Concepts

    in Technological Evolution," Research Policy, 14/ 5 (1985); 235-251; DorothyLeonard-Barton, "Implementation as Mutual Adaptation of Technology andOTganizalion." Research Policy, 17/ 5 (1988).

    24. See Donald Campbell. "Blind Variation and Selective Retention in CreativeThought as in Other Knowledge Processes," Psychological Review, 67 (1960):380-400.

    25. Arthur Koestler, The Act of Creation (New York, NY: Dell Press, 1964), p. 121.26. Herbert Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial {Cambndge, MA: PAIT Pre^s, 1981),

    p. 106.27. Csikszentmihalyi and Sawyer, op. cit., p. 342.28. The term "aeative abrasion" was coined by Gerald Hirshberg, President of Nissan

    Design International. See Dorothy Leonard-Barton, Wellsprings of Knowledge(Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1995), p. 63.

    29. Nonaka and Takeuchi, op. dt.30. Charlan Jeanne Nemeth, "Managing Innovaiion: When Less Is More," California

    Management Review. 40/1 (Fall 1997): 59-74; Charlan Jeanne Nemeth and JoelWachtler, "Creative Problem Solving as a Result of Majority vs. Minority Influ-ence" European Joumat of Social Psychology, 13 (1983): 45-55; Robin Martin,"Minority Influence and Argument Generation,' British Joumal of Social Psychology,35 (1996): 91-103.

    31. In a review of literature about diversity, Susan E. Jackson, Karen E. May, andKristina Whitney report that 'there is clear support for a relationship betweendiversity and creativity.' Sec Susan E. Jackson, Karen E. May, and Kristina Whit-ney "Understanding the Dynamics of Diversity in Decision-Ma king Teams," inSusan H. Jackson et al., eds.. Diversity in the Workplace: Human Resources Initiatives(New York, NY: Guilford Press, 1992), p. 230.

    32. Katherine Y. Williams and Charles A. O' Reilly III, "Demography and Diversity inOrganizations: A Review of 40 Years of Research," Research in Organizational Behav-ior, Vol. 20 (1998, forthcoming). The authors note that the same cannot necessar-ily be said of the implementation phase of the innovation process. This reviewalso points out that while 'functional diversity has positive effeas on group per-formance," other forms of diversity have been found to have negative effects.Information and decision theories maintain that increased diversity more likelyhas a positive effect on innovations, complex problems, or product designs,(which are the domains about which we are most concerned here), but socialcategorization and similarity/attraaion theories suggest that diversity is moreproblematic and can have a negative eifect on group process and performance.Much depends, then, not only on the task being addressed but on exactly whatkind of diversity is being researched, and through what theoretical lens the mater-ial is viewed. Clearly, some kinds of diversity can lead to disharmony. As we sug-gest in this article, the conflict that arises from intellectual disagreement has tobe tnanaged carefully, lest it spill over into personal anger.

    33. Irving L. Janis, Groupthink (Boston. MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1972, 1982). Janissuggests various ways of avoiding groupthink. including assigning someone the

    CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998 129

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    role of devil's advocate and inviUng into policy discussions outside experts orcolleagues noi normally included, who would be encouraged to challenge theviews of core members.

    34. This technique has been much denigrated after laboratory research revealed that'nominal groups" of individuals attacking a problem produced more, and better,ideas. However, such research relied upon highly artificial problems (e.g., whatcould you do with a second thumb on your hand?) and enlisted individuals whohad no prior knowledge of each other. The group dynamics obviously differ inreal worid circumstances in which pariicipanis know each other well (and there-fore do not spend time and energy on self presentation), the problem is aaua! andurgent, and, most important, their background expertise is relevant and probablyessential. In short, in the real world, tacit knowledge is critical to brainstormingand we believe that laboratory research underestimates the power of the tech-nique. See Robert I. Sutton and Andrew Hargadon, "Brainstorming Groups inContext: Effectiveness in a Product Design Firm," Administrative Science Quarterly,41/4 (December 1996): 685-718. Sutton and Hargadon report six importantconsequences for design firm IDEO as a result of this practice: supporting theorganizational memory of design solution; providing skills variety for designers;supporting an attitude of wisdom; creating a status auction; impressing clients;and providing income for the firm.

    35. Ove Granstrand, Erik Bohlin, Christer Oskarsson, and Niklas Sjoberg, "ExternalTechnology Acquisition in Large Multi-Technology Companies," Rt^D Management,22/2 (1992):lll-233.

    36. Interview, December 10, 1993.37. John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid, 'Organizational Learning and Communities-

    of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Orga-nization Science, 211 (1991); 40-57,

    38. See Dorothy Leonard and Susaan Straus, "Putting Your Company's Whole Brainto Work," Harvard Business Review. Vol. 75/4 (July/August 1997): 110-121.

    39. Product integrity reters to an internal dimensionnamely, the product's structureand functionand an external dimensionthe product's performance and theexpectation of customers. The process of development affects both dimensions.For a discussion of how the innovation process affects outcome, see Kim Clarkand Takahiro Fujimoto, "The Power of Product Integrity," Harvard Business Review.68/6 (November/December 1990): 107-118. See alsn Marco Iansiti, TechnologyIntegration (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998).

    40. See Dorothy Leonard and Jeffrey Rayjiort, "Sparking Innovation throughEmpathic Design," Harvard Business Review. 75/6 (November/December 1997):102-11 3. The topic is also discussed in Chapter Seven of Dorothy Leonard-Barton,Wellsprings of Knowledge (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1995 and1998).

    41. Moreover, even in high-volume, highly automated processes, workers' tadtknowledge about the way that particular equipment works and their ability toproblem solve is critical to continuous improvement. See Gil Preuss and DorothyLeonard-Barton, "Chaparral Steel: Rapid Produa and Process Development,"Harvard Business School Case 9-692-018.

    42. Alberto Cambrosio and Peter Keating, "Going Monoclonal; Art, Science and Magicin the Day-to-Day Use of Hybridoma Technology," Sodal Problems. 35/3 (June1988): 244-260.

    43. H. Zola and D. Brocks, "Techniques for the Production and Characterizationof Monoclonal Hybridoma Antibodies," in John G.R, Hurrell, ed.. MonoclonalHybridoma Antibodies: Techniques and Applications (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press)quoted in Cambrosio and Keating, op. cii., p. 248.

    130 CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL40,NO.3 SPRING 1998

  • The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    44. Cambrosio and Keating, op. cit., p. 249.45. See Preuss and Leonard-Bart on, op, cit.; John J. Kao, "Oticon (A)," Harvard

    Business School Case 9-395-144.46. See Scott D.N. Cook and Dvora Yanow's account of three flute workshops in

    "Culture and Organizational Learning," Journal of Management Inquiry, 214 (1993):373-390.

    47. For an explanation of "community of practice," see Jean Lave and EtienneWenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation (New York, NY: Cam-bridge University Press, 1991). For an application of the idea to organizations andbusinesses, see John Seeley Brown, 'Changing the Game ot Corporate Research:Learning to Thrive in the Fog of Reality," Raghu Garud, Praveen Rattan Nayyar,and Zur Baruch Sapira, eds.. Technological Innovations: Oversights and Foresights(Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 95-110: John S. Brownand E.S. Gray, "The People Are the Company," Fast Company, (premiere issue),pp. 78-82: Etienne Wenger, "Communities of Practice: Where Learning Happens,"Benchmark (Fall 1991), pp, 82-84.

    48. Helga Wild, Liby Bishop, and Cheryl Lynn Sullivan, "Building Environments forLearning and Innovation," Institute for Research on Learning Report to the Hewlett-Packard IRL Project, Menlo Park, CA (August 1996).

    49. Brown and Duguid, op. dt.50. See 'Fire and Forget?' The Economist. U.S. Edition, April 20, 1996, p. 51. Similarly,

    Freda Line, the membership manger of Britain's Employers Forum on Age (EFA),points out that many down-sizing companies have had to hire back as consultantsthose employees who have taken early retirement. It is not so much the skills andexperience that are needed, but many of those people "understood the crucialdevelopment history of their businessesa vita! part of corporate memory." SeeTim Dawson, 'Firms See Downside of Down-Sizing,' The London Times, June 1,1997.

    51. See Mihaly Csikszentmihaiyi, Plow (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1990).52. Csikszentmihaiyi, op. cit.53. See discussion of guiding visions in H. Kent Bowen, Kim B. Clark, Charles A.

    Holloway, and Steven C. Wheelwright, "Development Projects: The Engine ofRenewal," Harvard Business Review, 72/5 (September/October, 1994): 110-120.

    54. H. Kent Bowen, Kim B. Clark, Charles A. Holloway, and Steven C. Wheelwright,The Perpetual Enterprise Machine (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1994),p. 74.

    55. Nonaka and Takeuchi, op. cit., pp. 12-16.56. Angela Dumas, "Building Totems: Metaphor-Making in Product Development,"

    Design Management Journal, 5/1 (Wmter 1994): 70-82.57. Personal communication, December 1997.58. Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (New York, NY:

    HarperCollins, 1993).59. Leonard and Straus, op. cit.60. Interview, February 28, 1994.61. Interview, November 1984.62. Lisa Hope Pelled, "Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes:

    An Intervening Process Theory," Organization Science , 7/6 (1996): 615-631. Pelledlumps creative idea generation, decision making, and problem solving togetherin her definitions of cognitive tasks and considers group tenure, organizationaltenure, education, and functional background to be job-related diversity. "Themore job-related a particular type of diversity is, the stronger its relationship withsubstantive conflia will be. . . . The more visible a particular type of diversity is,the stronger its relationship wilh affective [i.e., emotional] conflict will be." [p. 3]

    CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL 40. NO. 3 SPRING 1998 131

  • The Roie of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation

    The literature reviewed by Williams and O' Reilly [op. cit.] seems to concur. Theclaim that diversity is beneficial for groups is based on variation in individualattributes such as personality, ability, and functional background.

    63. Especially Nonaka and Takeuchi, op. cit.; Leonard-Barton (1995), op. cii.64. For suggested ways of producing "light instead of heat" in very disparate groups,

    see Leonard and Straus, op. cit..65. Dorothy Leonard and Sylvia Sensiper, "American Management Systems: The

    Knowledge Centers," Harvard Business School Case N9-697-068.

    132 CAUFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL'W,NO.3 SPRING 1998