Research on the Rules of Evaluating Tacit Knowledge Transfer into Explicit Knowledge

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the perspective of enterprise collaborative evaluation consistency, experienced managers' tacit knowledge transfer into explicit knowledge for sharing is very important. However, enterprises often ignore the tacit knowledge when carrying on knowledge evaluation. This paper discusses the method of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge from the evaluators' evaluation judgment cases, and extracts the evaluation judgment rules. This paper pays attention to the pair-wised comparison of relative minimum elements in evaluation objects, and for plural attribute values, obtains the comprehensive priorities from the set of precedence relationships, and seeks the evaluation judgment rules. For the evaluation of attribute value, assuming comprehensive evaluation is non-monotonicity, the evaluation judgment theory is obtained based on necessary and sufficient conditions. In addition, if the pair-wised comparison is comparable, necessary and sufficient conditions will be closer, increasing the judgment proportion of using rules. This paper carries out an applied research about portable music player tacit knowledge evaluation rules, which shows the knowledge acquisition and performance results of the product evaluation.

Key words: tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge, knowledge management, decision support system, induction, evaluation rule

Wan Tao. Research on the Rules of Evaluating Tacit Knowledge Transfer into Explicit Knowledge[J]. , 2015, 27(7): 66-75.

References

[1] Gupta A., Mattarelli E., Satwik S., Broschak J. Use of Collaborative Technologies and Knowledge Sharing In Co-Located and Distributed Teams: Towards the 24-h Knowledge Factory[J]. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2009,3(1):101-109
[2] Stuart B., Peter B. Structure and Learning in Self-Managed Teams: Why "Bureaucratic" Teams Can Be Better Learners[J]. Organization Science, 2010,7(3):89-96
[3] Stuart B., Ray E. R. Power, Status and Learning in Organizations[J]. Organization Science, 2011,2(5):56-62
[4] Peter E. S., Alvin H. The Impact of Affective and Cognitive Trust on Knowledge Sharing and Organizational Learning[J]. The Learning Organization, 2013,5(1):123-130
[5] 刘景东,党兴华.不同知识位势下知识获取方式与突变创新的关系研究[J]. 管理评论, 2013,25(7):88-91
[6] 李卫东,刘洪.研发团队成员信任与知识共享意愿的关系研究——知识权力丧失与互惠互利的中介作用[J]. 管理评论, 2014,26(3):128-138
[7] Cantner U., Meder A. Regional Effects on Cooperative Innovation Activities and the Related Variety of Regional Knowledge Bases[J]. Jena Economic Research Papers, 2009,3(2):156-161
[8] Marco T., Ray R., Bill M. Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge between Organizational Units[J]. Organization Science, 2012,6(4):76-81
[9] Couchman P. K., Fulop L. Examining Partner Experience in Cross-Sector Collaborative Projects Focused on The Commercialization of R&D. Innovation: Management[J]. Policy & Practice, 2009,3(3):97-106
[10] 向希尧,蔡虹.基于专利引用的社会网络分析在知识管理研究中的应用[J]. 管理学报, 2012,9(4):562-569
[11] Hansen M. T., Birkinshaw J. The Innovation Value Chain[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2007,9(4):121-130
[12] 陈叶烽,叶航,汪丁丁.超越经济人的社会偏好理论: 一个基于实验经济学的综述[J]. 南开经济研究, 2012,5(1):63-100
[13] Quinlan J. Induction of Decision Trees[J]. Mach Learn, 1986,21(1):81-106
[14] 呼大永等.基于自组织神经网络和DEA的采购拍卖获胜者确定问题模型[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2012,32(2):398-404
[15] Jaakko A., Radomir S. Fundamentals of Switching Theory and Logic Design: A Hands-on Approach[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag New York Inc., 2006
[16] 李兆琼,杨锋等.考虑两种包络面的熵DEA效率评价模型[J]. 系统工程, 2010,28(4):68-73
[17] Calvanese D., Giacomo G. D. Expressive Descriptions Logics: The Description Logic Handbook[M]. London: Cambridge University Press, 2010
[18] Erdem T., Keane M. P., Sun B. A Dynamic Model of Brand Choice When Price and Advertising Signal Product Quality[J]. Marketing Science, 2008,27(6):1111-1125
[19] 朱立龙,尤建新.非对称信息供应链质量信号传递博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2011,19(1):109-118