Keeping it real
“Without real exchange, you can’t create knowledge. Knowledge creation is a human activity.” — Ikujirō Nonaka
Can you remember the year that World War II ended?
Do you know where Pitcairn Island is?
How about the meaning of the word “pochemuchka”?
If your reaction to any of the questions above was to reach for your phone to google the answer, you are not alone.
We are in the information age, where a huge amount of information and data is being created every second. However given the abundance of information, it is perhaps ironic that knowledge has become a forgotten asset. Knowledge is the understanding of how information and data strings together, and the creation of knowledge is the bedrock enabling the provision of information. Knowledge creation is a dynamic process, and often involves a complex interplay between teaching and learning from one another, and from observations which we make from our environment.
With the neglecting of knowledge, organisations would just see data points and lose sight of the wider picture. Consequently, the process of knowledge creation and management would be impeded. In my previous article, I had discussed the ways to put together an effective Knowledge Management (KM) strategy. Before I explore how organisations can use technology to manage/create knowledge, it would be timely to first understand (i) the forms in which knowledge exists, and (ii) how knowledge is created in organisations.
2 types of knowledge
For the purposes of knowledge management, it would be useful to differentiate between explicit and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is articulated knowledge, expressed and recorded in books, documents, audio, video etc. It is a tangible product which is easily identifiable, structured and objective. This explains why it is also relatively easy to share.
In contrast, tacit knowledge is highly personal and subjective. It is made up of idiosyncratic insights, hunches, and perhaps even intuition, drawn from our experiences and interaction with the world. It is that little voice in your head that reads (and sometimes screams) information that you have processed and stored. Such knowledge is highly valuable but difficult to codify, which means that it is challenging to communicate that with others. Just imagine: you are the defence counsel of an accused murderer. As you listen to him recounting the facts, you are also reading his body language. From the piecemeal and abstract information which you have obtained (i.e., the tacit knowledge you have about the case), you may then conclude and believe that he did not commit the crime. However, it is difficult to articulate and prove that belief, and you would have to rely on explicit evidence to communicate your tacit knowledge.
When Explicit meets Tacit
The interaction between explicit and tacit knowledge results in the creation of organisational knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi introduced the SECI model, where knowledge types can be combined and converted into new knowledge in four different ways — socialization, externalisation, combination, and internalisation.
Tacit knowledge is highly subjective. If your client comes to you with a new matter, the first few steps would be to gather your team to gather their perspectives on the case. This results in a tacit knowledge transfer, otherwise known as socialization. The objective of socialization is to create a form of shared experience where the lawyers in the team inhabit specific contexts and interact with other members, thus facilitating knowledge transfer which, in turn, results in greater knowledge creation. Examples of how socialisation is encouraged includes brainstorming and sprint sessions; they are designed to support the kind of interaction needed for socialisation.
Then you move on to find case precedents and pre-existing information (such as factual evidence) to substantiate the arguments which you would like to make. They exist as explicit knowledge and can come from multiple sources, and would ultimately need to be integrated for you to make your case. This is known as combination, where explicit knowledge is synthesised to form new knowledge. Alternatively, a ‘breakdown’ of previously understood concepts or ideas can also be a form of combination as it creates a new, systemic and explicit way to appreciate the same concept. Elon Musk practices the latter by adopting a mental strategy known as ‘First Principles Thinking’ for his company. So instead of following any process inflexibly or performing instructions without thinking, a first principle thinker will first question the process or instructions — is there a better way to do it?
Through emails or perhaps a sharing platform, you and your team would contribute research containing explicit knowledge, which is then understood and converted into tacit knowledge by everyone. This is the process of internalization. Internalization also occurs through continuous individual and collective reflection to recognise connections drawn and patterns observed between fields, ideas and concepts. This ensures that the team is on the same page with the same level of understanding of any given issue.
Lastly, externalization occurs each time tacit knowledge was, and is made explicit by way of publishing, articulating or documenting. This is a quintessential step to crystalize knowledge, thus allowing it to be shared with others. Experts have identified the use of metaphors, analogies, hypotheses, or models as important externalization techniques. However, many organizations struggle with this step. Tacit knowledge is difficult to codify, and the difficulty and tedium of capturing tacit knowledge means that it gets deprioritized or even outrightly ignored. So when written work are produced by your team (such as submissions or client advice memorandums), the work product only captures a fraction of the tacit knowledge gained by the team. Knowledge which was deemed less important (such as why a particular course of action was not pursued) would usually be lost and forgotten.
Supporting KM with technology
If the tacit knowledge dimension is neglected, then any KM effort would be a limited one. Tacit knowledge capture means focusing on the people and processes involved, and technology can often help with that.
While Information Technology (I.T.) can only work on what is tangible, i.e. explicit knowledge, it does play an important supporting role in knowledge creation. I.T. can be used to facilitate information collaboration within and between teams. Advancements in technology means that the collaboration can take varied forms — video, audio, or text — and, as long as these interactions are recorded or documented, can be made available for search and review thereafter. The codification of knowledge becomes a natural consequence of the collaboration.
Besides helping with the conversion of tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge, technology can also provide access to data or information for the right person at the right time. We are beginning to realize that KM is more than just keeping documents in a file management system and making its content searchable. Having thousands of results returned for a simple search means more time has to be spent digging through for the relevant documents. Modern I.T. systems can capture unstructured and rich metadata (data about your data)which provides contextual information, allowing for a better retrieval experience and perform trendspotting functions. These systems will enable law firms to make better decisions and allows a virtuous cycle of knowledge creation to take root; which in turn provides the foundation and building blocks to scale greater heights with consistent access to new knowledge.
We once speculated, and some even feared, that technology would someday supersede the best of us. But it is increasingly clear now that it is simply looking for a master, and we feel it most compelling to oblige.
Disclaimer: the concepts presented in this article are developed by academics who have done extensive study in the discipline of Knowledge Management. We merely combined and converted them (a form of knowledge creation in itself!) for our target readers. For more detailed reads, you may want to refer to the academic works of Prof Ikujiro Nonaka, Prof Hirotaka Takeuchi, Prof Noboru Konno.
Special thanks to our summer intern, Vinny Yap, for her editorial work on this article.
