Asia Pacific Management Review 2001 6(1) , 21-38
A cognitive approach to knowledge management
Shigehisa Tsuchiya.
In Japan , managers have only lately begun to see knowledge management as a methodology
of critical importance. It is because, to share and make full use of knowledge in the organization,
they can no longer rely on job rotation and on-the-job training based on the Ii fetime employment
system. A recent nationwide survey on knowledge management of Japaoese companies has con
叮叮ned that the most 附帶0口ant and difficult task in knowledge management is to change the interpretative frameworks of employees. The author claims policy exercise is one of the few methodologies for transfonnation of inte叩retati ve frameworks that is essenrial precondition for knowledge
management
K叮!Words:
lnterpretative Framework; Kn owledge Manageme肘 ; Policy Exerci 間 ; Survey
1. Introduction
Knowledge management has become increasingly impo此ant for managing a company in today's environme帥， where many factors are neither constant
nor predictable [7]. In an economy where the only certainty is uncertain旬 ， the
one sure source of lasting competitive advantage is knowledge [9)
In Japan , however, managers have only lately begun to see knowledge
management as a methodology of critical irnportance. lt is because , to share and
make full use of knowledge in the organization，也ey can no longer rely on job
rotation and on-the-job 甘aining based on the lifetime employrnent system that
was once regarded as one of the key success factors of Japanese cornpanies
Unlike in Europe and USA where knowledge management has been widely
irnplemented and several qualitative and quantitative surveys are conducted
annually (e.g. MAKEsm by Teleos) , only a few case studies ofprominent companies on knowledge management are available in Japan
A project team of the Institute of Posts and Telecommunications Policy
(of which the author was advisor) recently conducted a nationwide survey on
knowledge management of Japanese companies. The survey methods were
questionnaires to large Japanese companies and to ernployees , and interviews
with the rnanagers of several Japanese companies prorninent in knowledge
management
Deptartment of Projecl Manageme肘， C h iba Institute ofTechnology , Japan; Fax: +8 1-47-478-0583;
E-ma il 阻 uc h iya @pf. it-c h i ba . ac.jp
21
Shigehisa TSllchiya
2. Questionnaire survey
The purpose of the questionnaire survey was to make quantitative assessment of the present state and problems of ‘ knowledge asset management'
perceived (1) by Japanese companies and (2) by their employees
In this survey,‘ knowledge assets ' is the general terrn for the assets that
create value in a company , such as knowledge , technique , know-how , knowwho , rnanual , document , pate肘， and customer data ‘Kn owledge asset managemen t' is a management technicjue to increase competitiveness of a company by
utilizing the knowledge assets existing in the company through acquisitio日 ， accumulation, sharing, ut i!ization, creation, and inheritance
The questionnaire was based on our findings from Ii terature surveys. It
contained 16 pages with 48 questions. We sent out two questionnaires -- one to
cornpanies and the other to employees so that we can compare the perception of
topm且 nagement to that of employees. We rnailed 也ec。中 orate ques tI onnalre to
3 ， 3 日 large Japanese cornpanies including all Ii sted companies and received
replies from 393 companies (11 %). The individual questionnaire was sent by email to 800 ernployees , of which 489 replied (61 %). The collection ratios were
rather low because 也e questionnaires were quite detailed
2.1 . Questionnaire
The rnain items of the questionnaires were as follows
1. Kn owledge assets (KAs) 一 (1) 00 you have sufficient KAs? (2) Are you
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
utilizing them effectively? (3) 00 you have fear to lose important KAs
when your important employees quit?
Sharing 叫 utilizing KAs 一 (1) Are they important for cornpetition? (2)
Are you managing KAs?
Perrneation of ideas on KA rnanagernent 一 (1) How are you diffusing
your ideas? (2) How wide do they perrneate? (3) Which department do
they perrneate most。
Irnplernentation of KA management -- (1) Which KAs are important for
you? (2) Are you actually rnanaging them? (3) In which department do
irnportant KAs exist? (4) In which position do they exist? (5) Which
process is irnportant for KA management? (6) Which process are you actua l1 y irnplernenting?
Promotion of KA managernent 一(1) 00 you have speci 日c departrnent( 5)
or person(s) for prornotion? (2) How are they prornoting KA managernent? (3) 00 you have a chiefknowledge officer?
Incentive for KA management 一 ( 1) What is the rnost effective incentive? (2) Which incentive are you implernenting?
22
Shigehisn Tsuchiya
7. Effects of KA management 一 (1) How effective is your KA. management? (2) What kind of effects does it have? (3) In which department is
it effective?
8. Necessary conditions for promoting KA management
9. Obsta cI es in promoting KA management
10. Preferable condition of Kas
11. Degree of sharing KAs 一 (1) Where are they shared? (2) Wh at media are
used'l
12.In仕astructure 一 (1) Number of personal computers per capita (2) Information infras甘ucture: internet, intran仗， group-ware , data-warehouse
13. Application for sharing KAs -- e-rnail , e-board , e-conference , scheduling
system, web page , etc
14. Outline ofyour company
2.2. Outcomes
Some of the interesting outcomes of the questionnaires are as follows
(a) Present state
Kn owledge assets in the organization
(1) Most companies (94.6%) and employees (83.7%) believe that they
do not have sufficient knowledge assets to be competitive
(2) In addition , almost all companies (97.9%) and most employees
(84 .6%) adrnit that knowledge assets in the organization are not fuIIy
utilized
(3) Most companies are a丘aid of losing precious knowledge assets due
to resignation of key employees
A wareness and implementation
( 1) Almost aII companies (96.9 percent) and employees (97.6 percent)
are aware ofthe importance ofknowledge asset management
(2) Most compa凹的(7 6 . 5 %) and more than half of employees (57 .7%)
believe that the c.ompanies are already practicing knowledge asset
management in one way or another
• The most important knowledge assets
Most companies and employees cI aim that the most impo口ant knowledge assets are the ones acquired through experience (personal skiII and
know-how , and experiential knowledge in departments)
Levelofmanagement
However, since such knowledge assets can hardly be articulated , it is diι
ficult for organizations to manage them. This is the reason why the
knowledge assets actually managed by organizations are mostly forrnal
knowledge assets shared in the depar值lent and the organization, even
though 出ey Iist knowledge assets acquired through experience as the
most important assets. Although many employees (49 .1 %) cJ aim that
23
Shigehisa Tsuchiya
they are sharing and utilizing personal skill and know-how , but only personally or within their own departrnent. Apparently, personal experiential knowledge assts are shared and utilized in inforrnal imd personal
ways
Departrnent where knowledge assets exist
The largest number of the companies list the sales departrnent as the departrnent where knowledge assts exist (66.0%) , and believe that knowledge assets rnanagement is most effective in this departrnent (58.1 %)
However , only a small number of the companies (30.5%) are actually
implementing knowledge asset rnanagement in the sales department
(b) Organizational management
Effective incentive
(1) Only very small number of the employees (1. 4%) are reluctant to
share knowledge assets -- about 45 percent are providing and
utilizing actively, and over 50 percent when necessary
(2) 甘le largest number of the companies and the employees bel閃閃出at
the most effective incentive for promoting knowledge asset rnanagement is the assessment of employees' perforrnance. However , less
than ten percent of the companies are actually practicing such evalua110n system
• Prirnary promotion factor
Most companies (60.3%) and employees (68.7%) point out that the most
lmpo口ant factor for promoting knowledge asset management is a drastic
reforrn of 也e interpretative frameworks (values and world views) of the
employees . 的 percent of the companies confess that more than half of
their employees do not understand the company's policy about knowledge asset management
• Prirnary obstacle
Most companies (62.2%) believe that the largest obstacle in knowledge
asset management is insufficient understanding and awareness of the
importance of sharing and utilizing individual knowledge in the organizahon
Employees consider that the largest obstacle is lack of incentives an d/or
evaluation system (47 .8%) and the second obstacle by a naITOW inargin
is insufficient understanding and awareness (45.1 %)
Prirnary factors determining effectiveness
Companies consider the factors determining effectiveness of knowledge
assets are (1) possibility of sharing in many departrnents (64.8%) , (2)
freshness (62.9%) , and (3) high quality (60.7%) , while emp loyees bel閻明 they are (1) high quality (64.0%) , (2) 台eshness (57.5%) , and (3)
possibility of sharing in rnany departrnents (5 1. 5%)
.
.
24
Shigehisa Tsuchiy a
(c) Summary
(1) Over 90 percent ofthe employees as we Il as the comp缸ues are aware
。f importance of knowledge asset management and eager to imph:mentl t.
(2) Most cornpanies and employees believe that the most important
knowledge assets are individual tacit knowledge (skill and know
how) 的quired through experience by its employees in the field (Fig
1). However, they admit that the knowledge assets they . ac仙a Ily
manage are mostly formal explicit knowledge such as repo口s and
manuals (Fig. 2)
(3) Over 60 percent of the cornpanies and the employees point out that
the most impo此ant factor for promoting knowledge asset management is drastic change of the inte中retative frameworks of employees
(Fig. 3). These companies believe that the largest obstacle in knowledge asset management is insufficient understanding and awareness
by employees of the importance of sharing and utilizing individual
knowledge in the organization (Fig. 4)
3. Interview
To conflfll1 our interpretation of the outcomes of the questionnaires , we
visited several Japanese companies prominent in successful knowledge 口llm­
agement. They include Eisai , Fujitsu, Tokyo Marine and Fire Insurance , Family
Mart, and Human Group. In the interviews with the managers in charge , we
asked questions related to 也e following problems
(1) transformation of interpretative framework ,
(2) promotion ofknowledge asset management,
(3) management oftacit knowledge assets
Transfonnation of interpretative framework
According to the questionnaire乳白e critical precondition for promoting
knowledge asset management is transform且tion of the interpretative frameworks of employees. We asked the managers in charge how they did it
• Eisai (a large pharmaceutical company): In 1989 , President Naito declared
the new cornpimy vision ‘ hurnan hea lth care (岫c)' and began training 恤c
managers. In the period of 1992 to 1997 ， 也e hhc managers played key roles
to have the new vision shared among all employees and irnplemented in
daily activities. Eisai started knowledge-creation based management in 1997
on the theory ofNonaka [9]
Fujitsu (a large electronic company): Transformation was not necessary because , being a young company, Fujitsu had from the beginning in峙中re個­
tive frameworks of 也e 'enacting mode' in Weick's 也eory [16]
.
25
Shigehisa TSllchiya
.
Tokyo Marine (a large marine and fire insurance company): Recent deregulation of insurance industry has created among management and employees
shared crisis awareness that triggered transformation of interpretative frameworks in the company
Fanúly Mart (a large convenience store chain): Being a federation of sma!!
profit centers , transformation of frameworks was not necessary
• Human Group (a sma!! group of companies owned by a family): For the past
ten years , the president of the companies has been forcing his employees to
parti~ipate in playing the Nishi's Management Game over and over again so
that they can understand the state of the company, share crisis awareness ,
and share values
.
Promotion oJknowledge assets management
• CO mllÚ trnent of the top management
A!! these prominent companies we visited claimed that firrn comnútrnent of
the top management was the most impo前ant factor in promoting knowledge
asset management
Incentive
Eisai: They have President Commendation and individual assessment syste肌
Fujitsu: They discontinued a money reward system where the user of the
knowledge paid money to the provider, because it did not encourage sharing knowledge management. Fujitsu now have an assessment system of
the performance of an individual and a department in knowledge asset
managemen t. The individuals and departments compete with each other in
the company. The keen business competition against other companies is
also a s甘ong incentive
Tokyo Marine: Competition in the company and loyalty to the organization are the principal incentives in Tokyo Marine
Fanúly Mart: Making profit is the incentive in 也is company.
• Human Group: The incentive is the assessment of employees' perfo口nance
• Grudging
In these companies , the employees do not grudge in sharing knowledge
..
.
.
.
Management oJ tacit knowledge assets
The five companies also had difficulties in sharing tacit knowledge assets
in the organization because , by de品J.ition， tacit knowledge can hardly be expressed in any kind of language [1 1). Tacit knowledge cannot be shared by
manuals or computer networks. Since we can only acquire tacit knowledge
through sharing experience , Japanese companies have been relying heavily
upon on-the-job-個ining ， group work, and job rotation to share tacit knowledge
However , sharing experience has scale problems. We cannot share tacit knowl-
26
Shigehisa TSllchiya
edge assets throughout the organization by sharing experience due to limitation
in time and space
Although indirectly, some companies the author visited for interview
were successfully sharing tacit knowledge throughout the organization by using
computer networks in the following ways
• Sharing ‘process ' by computer network
Employees are required to do their daily job electronically by using computer network so that other employees can share 也e process of their work
By sharing process , we can read between the lines and acquire knowledge
that cannot be articulated
• Sharing ‘ hints ' by computer network
Employees are encouraged to share hints regarding their skills and knowhow. They can apply the hints to their own job , share experience indirectly,
and acquire tacit knowledge
• Sharing know-who by computer network
百le knowledge about ‘ who knows what' 的 shared on the compute.r network
4. Key factor - organizationallearning
Japanese companies are confronted with the following major difficulties
in implementing knowledge asset management
(1) Transformation of the int呻retative frameworks essential for knowledge
asset management, and
(2) Management oftacit knowledge assets
Both problems have one key factor in common, that 芯 ， necessity of evolving
interpretative 金ameworks through organizational double-Ioop learning. Interpretative frameworks are the frames of reference within which individuals and
organizations interpret their experience [10]. They are the cognitive schernata
that map their experience of the world , identifying both its relevant aspects and
how to understand them
To overcome the largest obstacle in knowledge asset management 也at IS
insufficient understanding and awareness by employees, we need to transform
their interpretative 台ameworks . In order to manage tacit knowledge as呦， it is
also essential to evolve commensurability of inte中retative frameworks of the
organization and its employe郎， because tacit knowledge can only be expressed
and transferred indirectly by means of metaphors articulated through hisfher
interpretative framework [11] . Tacit knowledge cannot be shared in the organi
zation unless the interpretative frameworks are commensurable since, to become knowledge, the metaphors need to be interpreted through the framework
of the receiver
27
Shigehisn TSllchiy n
Double-loop learning
Evolution of inte中retative framework requires double-loop leaming [汀 ，
which is extrernely difficult for organizations as well as individuals because
mte中retative frameworks are resistant to change [13]. Double-loop leaming
occurs when mismatches between the design for action and the outcome are
corrected by first examining and altering the goveming interpretative frarnework and then the actions [1]. Since what has happened is not always obvious ,
and the causality of events is difficult to untangle , outcomes can be interpreted
in various ways. lndividuals and organizations seldom acknowledge mismatch
也at can only be corrected by altering goveming inte中 retative frameworks
They often seem to be able to reinterpret their objectives or the outcomes in
such a way as to make themselves appear successful even when their shortfall
seerns quite large [8]. Even when they admit they have a rnisrnatch , they 吋 to
develop stories in suppo口 of inte中retations that sustain goveming frarneworks
Therefore , leaming is alrnost always single-loop , which reinforces the goveming interpretative frarnewor k.
Organizations as well as individuals develop their interpretative frarneworks through leaming by experience, or through rn且 king sense of the outcornes of their decisions and actions [1 , 3, 8]. The rnost powerful leaming
cornes frorn direct experience , but “ Leaming by doing" on1 y works so long as
the feedback frorn actions is rapid and unarnbiguous [12]
Leaming by experience is very difficult because , in the real wor泊 ， there
exist rnany factors that lead to what Senge [1 月 called the “ dilernrna of leaming
企orn experience." These factors include
Leaming honzon: lndividuals and organizations have a “ leaming horizon,"
a breadth of vision in tirne and space within which they assess the consequences of their actions
• Scarcity of experience: History offers on1 y rneager sarnples of experience
• Irreversibility: Actions cannot be reversed or taken back in real business. The risk
and cost of trial and error is often too rnuch for us to take.
Double-loop leaming of an organization requires an intuitive and unca \ibrated approach. Most scientific techniques available for rnanagers are in the
rational-calibrated quadrant in Arrns甘ong ' s theory [2] and there have been no
estab!ished techniques in the intuitive-uncalibrated quadran t. ln the opinion of
the author, po \icy exercise seerns to be the on1 y possibi!ity [14]
.
Po l.吋 exercise
- a new meth仰od，
ω
'ology 戶
jord，
28
Shigehisa TS lI chiy a
decisions. There are some successful applications of policy exercise to the real
world issues especially in the United States and 也e Netherlands although their
scientific validation is still difficult
Un 叩feconll 伽aion
o[gaming/simulation
Policy exercise can provide interactive organizational learning environment and make double-loop learrting possible. The author and his colleague
induced hypotheses about the unique contribution of gaming/simulation 伽ough
two detailed case studi的 ， and verified their validity by additional case studies
and theoretical reasoni月 [1 月 The reasons why gami月Isimulation can facilitate organizational double-loop learning are as follows
• Voluntary leaming: When forced , we leam little because we resist accepting
anything new to our goveming interpretative frameworks. The fun elements
of gaming/simulation encourage us to participate in experiential lea口llng
environment in a simulated world and learn voluntarily
• Creation of turmoi l: As noted by Festinger [4] the first step in changing attitudes , beliefs and assumptions is to let them doubt the validity of their goveming interpretative frameworks. The con f1 ict and turmoil created by gam
ing/simulation raises a doubt in their mind and lessens the resistance against
change
• Pig picture: The schematic enables participants 10 share a holistic view of
the issue. lt counteracts the narrow perspectives that derive from specialization, and to provide a mode of retaining detai l. When 也ey grasp the whole ,
the individual interpretative frameworks of participants become large r. As a
consequence, compatibility of their inte中retative frameworks increases and
creation of a shared mental model becomes possible
• Compression: Compression of tirne and space (a) rnakes experiential learning possible and (b) accelerate learning process. Gaming/simulation enables
participants to experience the outcomes of their new decisions and actions in
a short period of tirne. In the real world , we have little opportunities of
leaming from experience m且inly because the outcomes of our decisions and
actions are often beyond our leaming horizons. In addition , accelerated
leaming process facilitates double-loop leaming. As mentioned before, we
seidom acknowledge misrnatch 曲t can only be corrected by altering goveming
mterpre包tive frameworks. However, when we encounter such fundamental misrnatch, 0叮 mte中re恤ve frameworks are affected and a\tered although 卸 change
may be urmoticeably srnall. Gaming/simuI ation enabl
29
Shigehisa 1'suchiYll
less times. Thus , the risk-free environment provided by gaming/simulation
expands the range of experiences that make sense to pa吋 icipants . Although
theyare ‘ lesser' experiences [旬， they are far less costly in time and money ,
and can be made available to far more people
• Shared experience 甘1fough the shared experience in gaming/simulation, individ凶lin紀rpre帥ve frarneworks of participants converge 阻止 as a ïesul t, increase
commensurability that is essential for the creation of a shared mental model
• Rich inte叩retation of history: The expansion of our comprehension of past
experience or "history" - through gaming/simulation enables us to learn
from small episodes within the real world. Small pieces of experience are
used to construct a theory of history from which a variety of umea lized , but
possible additional scenarios are generated. The rich interpretation of history
facilitates experientiallearning
Cause maps: Ambiguity and uncertainty in the real world hinder our experiential learning because they make it difficult to find meanings or invent explanations. The cause maps developed through participation in designing
and playing gamin g/simulation help participants to inte中ret and make sense
oftheir lives
.
5. A first policy exercise in Japan
To prove further his hypotheses that policy exercise can facilitate evolution of interpretative frameworks through double-Ioop leaming because of the
abovementioned reasons , the author organized a project team to design and run
a policy exercise for operating crews of nuclear power plants. They targeted
their first policy exercise to nuclear power plant crews because they are ideal
for experimentation: (1) they have to maintain performance in rather isolated
circurnstance , (2) a number of identical groups (crews) are available , and (3)
their performance can be objectively measured
lmplicit coordination , shared menlalmodels, and commensurability
To cope with an emergency situation, the crew of a nuclear power plant
has to rnake collective decisions and perform task collaboration effectively under severe stress caused by heavy workload , time pressure , unce此ainty， auditory
overload, auditory interference , etc. The crew often has to maintain perfo口心
ance even when communication oppo討unities are reduced. Under conditions of
high workload , time pressure and other kind of Stress , such ‘ implicit coordina臼 on ' appears to be critical
This ability of ‘ implicit coordination' depends on the crew's ability to
draw on a common understanding of the current s ituatio日 ， the task, the goals to
be achieved , and the roles of crew members. Recently , several authors have
hypothesized that the mechanisms that allow this 句pe of perforrnance are
‘ shared mental models ' [5]. Even in absence of proper communication among
30
Shigehis t1 TSIICh l) l fl
them, shared mental models allow crew members to predict the needs of the
task and anticipate the actions of other crew members in order to adjust their
behavior accordirigly. Development of shared mental models requires
commensurability of interpretative frameworks of crew members , because ,
without commensurability , the same information can be interpreted differently
by the members
“ Th e hiddel1 for ll1!1 la "
The pr句 ect team designed this policy exercise based on the 24 steps of
Professor Duke , an emeritus professor of the University of Michigan
(a) Primmy objective
The primary objective of this policy exercise is to train crew members in
the cognitive area for effective group decision making and task coordination
under stress. This exercise can open their mind for leaming on the critical role
of shared rnental models in crew performance , and motivate crew members for
making spontaneous efforts in their daily work to improve commensurability of
their interpretative frameworks in order to build common models of the task
and to develop and maintain accurate shared situation assessment
(b) Brief description
There are three perspectives and five roles in this policy exercise - one
leader, one sub-Ieader, and three operators. The leader is to guess the hidden
three numbers in the displays in front of the three operators and deduce the nurnerical formula applicable to these numbers
On each display, a part of the three numbers is hidden behind the panels
One of the panels opens randornly for one second at regular intervals showing a
part of the figure. The operators m且 ke verbal report to the leader and sub-leader
what they see in the display. They are not allowed to record what they see
The leader, with the assistance of the sub-Ieader, records the reports. It is
difficult to record all utterance because two persons have to cover three reporters. ln addition , since each operator has only a few seconds to m且 ke a report , a
detailed repo口 of an operator will force other operators either to rnake overlapping utterance or to skip á repo前
Immediately after the exercise ，出e process of the exercise is reproduced
on the screen so that the pa吋 icipants can make objective observance of their
own activities. Three personal computers , three scan converters , a multi viewer,
two video cameras , and a digital video recorder keep complete record of 也e
policyexercise
31
Shìgehisa
Ts uclriya
(c) Special features
This exercise uses 也ree PCs instead of game boards although it is designed for human interactions. [t gives the following special features
• see if they have actually improved comrnensurability of their The facilitator
can make complete reproduction of the process of the exercise irnmediately
after the exercise and let the crew members observe objectively their activities that are often quite different from the image they have in mind. Acknowledgement ofthe gap between reality and normative model opens their
mind for leaming. The exercise can encourage participants to make efforts
to develop , operate on , update , and maintain shared mental models in their
daily work
The process as well as the results of the exercise can be fully analyzed later
to assess performance of the crew and its members - contents of information,
communication skills, supporting behavior, team initiative/leadership , task
coordination, and adaptability
• The facilitator can also show the participants the activities of other crews for
companson
• After several months , the participants can play this exercise again and compare their activities with these of the previous exercise to inte叩retahve
frameworks and enhanced ability to develop shared mental models
The facilitator can adjust the level of difficulty easily so as to keep all participants interested in 由e exerclse
Crews are periodically trained using full mock-up simulators. In simulator
training , however, ernphasis is on task-work skills. This exercise is designed
to focus on cognitive side of the work. Its features compared to mock-up
simulator training include
The exercise is suitable for cross 甘aining because it does not require skills
Cross 甘aining is an effective technique for developing the crew 's shared
mental models
• Since it is an abs仕action of 出 e real work, the participants can feel at ease to
express what he/she has in mind
It is far less expensive and less time consuming to run and analyze the exercise than simulator training.
.
.
.
.
.
(d) Outcomes
After many in-house test runs of the ‘ Hidden Formula,' we have recently
run the exercise for the 甘ainers of the BWR Operator Training Center -出ree
times at Kariha and three times at Fukushima with intervals of about four weeks
Their daily job is to train operators of central control rooms of nuclear power
plants using full mock-up simulators
32
Shigeh;sll 仙 Ichiyll
We discussed the results of our analyses with the president and the participants and other trainers of the Center and came to the following conclusions
( 1) The exercise has apparently improved commensurability of frameworks of
the participants and enhanced ability to develop shared mental models
(2) The exercise has the potential to improve crew performance by fostering
shared mental models essential for implicit coordination. The president
has decided to start using this exercise for training of operators
(3) The exercise has clearly re v.ealed characteristics of the crew and its members. We can use it to assess the crew's ' implicit soc ial norms ,' or their
organizational culture , that are predictors of safe performance. For instance , to ensure safety, crew members need to feel 仕的 to volunteer info口nation ， make suggestions, and express concems. A number of accidents have occurred because 'implicit soc ial norms' of the crew hindered
open communication making subordinate personnel reluctant to bring
critical inforrnation to the attention of the leader
5. Conclusion
This survey has conflrmed that the most important and difflcult task in
knowledge management is to change the interpretative 仕ameworks of employees through double-loop leaming. To overcome the largest obstacle in knowledge asset management, we need to transform the interpretative 合ameworks of
employees and let them become fully aware of its irnportance. To manage tacit
knowledge assts that is most important but extremely difflcult to share and util也吼叫 is also essential to evolve commensurability of interpretative frameworks
of the organization and its employees , because tacit knowledge can only be expressed and transferred indirectly by means of metaphors whose interpretation
depends on the frameworks of the receivers. Although the survey was limited to
Japanese companies , it is very likely that the results are applicable to most
companies in USA and Europe. The author believes policy exercise can provide
an interactive learning environment to evolve inte中retative framework overcorm月 the dilemma of leaming from experience
Acknowledgements
This research project was financed by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientiflc Research of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science , the grant from the
Foundation for Fusion of Science & Technology, and the grant from the Research lnstitute ofChiba Institute ofTechnology
33
Shigehisa Tsuchiy a
66 .9
KAx恥i'H' I'tr04.咽 h ..帥，旬，也.b，
恥divid uals
4$.8
23.
..帥，.州 ~'KA 缸'IKInII orllan b: aliont
聞n.ftud
lorm
KA ﹒桐 'H <JfTIOf'Ig
國呵，可lulionl
..“
form KA shand
wnonv
。 rganiulio憎
已。n1ld.nc.wllhcω10m""
KAecqu"HI I'tr叫，h ﹒凰PI， itnc.wilh
5
fø:HfOf'lll KA.ha阿叫 wllhcl酬。m"，
Fig. 1 Important knowledge assets
34
Shigehisa Ts uchiy a
|﹒ companies 口而叫一1
v..,. .,-.d worldviewoflndlvid1JlII
employ闢
Kh ，曲“酌，。呵 hø"，闕'ÞC.by
indlvidu'"
non-IbωKAformprovld“.，
Indlvidulh
h
“
formKAprovldedbykldlvlduall
心叫 '''d啊叫
..~ ienlj"KAln ln. dep.lmIII1吋
…
-恥做“ formKA 剖，.ωm'胸
d.p
flXedform 恥 .h叫 inlhed~.lmenl
65
叫翩而岫呵間樹"
Ul*'teI叫 "KA. 盼"'Of，，_.rIon
non . lixedformKAhe細_
..
。.，岫啪"
fix .-l form
KA 陶oId inlheor，，_宜
，.何制_..祠l'I9 or ，，_世
....
.....
uperienti" KA .rncm" or".lIut切m
non-lI..dformKAlh.“呵呵
or，，_噓 ..M
filItc:l form 制訓....-呵
國N'".wz.tiGns
KAk"""“It1rough u.per*鷺..愉
non.fixedformKA 的.“
w枷
fil .-l form 叫叫.愉叫開間
Fig _ 2 Kn owledge assets actually manage d
35
Shigehisa Tsuchiya
區已mpanles 口 empl咖自 |
…﹒叫 .y.t....~
m咽""~岫同制
..tlll"間 nl ofKAm ...申叫
...鉗制*" I CKO
蚓帥"“etlonoflnformltlon
tKmo lo'Ol y
8.7
tr_formllt悟 noflmploy_
酬"咽叫 “Î'llfr....wol1l﹒
""~… ollnform.tion …“
m 呵酬酬
;8.4
棚 prO'llm酬。 I lnIorm.tlon 恤，叫“
.mploy_
32.3
.宜".咽勵曲，怖，旬開酬 tl tlonof KA
毛2.8 1
岫叫叫 m...llocrltlc p<<lon，. 1
e tø. .e 可.， ..，耐心叫 ﹒
e..llc: lflon01
m ，"呵.m﹒'"吋-.. ，
'""帽""
2517
Ian.，.. 1海 IItopm恥"﹒冊 ."tlavω
7.8
13f3~3
M ﹒恤 prof ....on..... 制
m .，.，..，.嚼
..
'‘
Flg . 3 Primary factors promoting KA managemenl
36
Shigehisa Tsuchiya
| .c的戶心而…pl再一1
叫‘".0' l1li'“崢呵 kM棚"帽_...﹒
1
4 8
"岫們僧"“-_.﹒叫 ey .'.m
noIM FNF1menlloffic祠"Ineh... .
8.8
﹒惜'1-0- 0' 1"'01' ''咽"'，旬，悟m
叫阿…叫“叫“吋叫
62.2
KA~呵呵..
....""-“棚"“開“坤
31 .2
30.4
甸甸" lnfOfmlltlo~ 陶 wwcyof...例iOy-.
a
2....
22.4
22.4
25.7
2".2
26.
M 叫…ttoWtr.lnlno ..，..''''
誼通 3713
Fig . 4 Primary obslacles in promoting KA management
37
Shigehisa Tsuchiya
References
Argyris C and Schön DA (1978) Organizational learnin g. A theory oJ
action p erspective. Addison-\月1esl旬， Readin皂， MA
(2) Anns仕ong RHR and Hobson M (1975) Introduction to gaming-simulation
techniques. ln Greenblat , C. S. , and Duke , R.D . (Eds .) , Gαm­
ing/simulation : Rationale, design, and applications, 82-90. Sage Publications , Thousand Oaks, CA
(3) Bartunek 1M (1984) Changingînterpretive schemes and organizational
restructuring. Administratiνe Science Quarter紗，紗， 355-372
(4) Festinger L (1 957) A I}z，由ryoJ，α"Jgnitive dissonance. StlUÚ咽 University press，扭曲肚
(5) Cannon-Bowers JA and Salas E (1998) lndividual and team decision making under stress: Theoretical underpinnings . In Cannon-Bowers , J. A. , and
Salas ， 已 (Eds . ) ， Making decisions under stress .
17-38. American
Psychological Association , Washington , DC
(6) Greenblat CS (1989) Extending the range of experience. ln Crookall , D.,
and Saunde芯， D . (Eds.) , Communication and simulation: From fW O fields
10 one theme, 269-283. Multilingual Matters , Clevedon , UK
(7) Hammer M and Champy J (1993) Reeng ineering the corporation: A
manifesto Jor business revolution. HarperCollins, New York , NY
(8) Levitt B and March JG (1 988) Organizationa lleaming. Ann ual R eνiewoJ
Sociology , 14 , 3 19-340
(9) Nonaka 1 (1 991) The Knowledge-creating company. Harvard Busin臼5
Review , November-December 1991 , 96-104
(1 0) Polanyi M (1958) Personal knowledge. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
(1 1) Polanyi M (1966) Th e lacil dim ension . Routledge and Kegan Paul, Lo ndon
(1)
[υ12
勾) Se
組
ng
伊
ePM (υ1990
仍) Th e 戶
)7)ρ1 h d叫ψ
糾line : r.刊
n ea rt a吋 pra cl叫 oJ 的
I，'h e 佮
1，earn
nm
削
or
愕
gam
甘ization.
Century Business
S (1998) Reengineering rnanagemen t. Internalional η'a nsac­
tions in Operational Research , 5(4) 27 1-281
(14) Tsuchiya S (1 999) Creating 1eaming organization. In Schreinekake的， J.F. ,
and Barth訟， J: (eds.) , Knowledge managemen l: Entelprise, ne fWork and
learning, 101-107. ERGON Verla皂， WÜTzburg
(15) Tsuchiya T and Tsuchiya S (1999) The Uoique contribution of gaming/simulation: towards establishment ofthe discipline. ln Saunders , D . &
Severs , J. (eds.) , The internation a/" simulation and gaming research yearbook: Simulations and games Jor Slralegy and policy plannü嗨， 746-5 7
Kogan Page , London
(16) Weick 阻 and Daft 虹 (1983) The e伶ctive nes s of interpretation systerns
In Cameron, K . S. and Whitten, D. A. (eds .) , Organizational effecliνe­
ness: A comparison oJ multiple models, 7 卜的 Academic Press , San Diego , CA
[1 月 Tsuchiya
38