Content area
Full Text
Introduction
Knowledge is considered as one the most important asset that increases efficiency and productivity in organisations. It is therefore important to prudently develop and manage knowledge in a way that will allow people in a particular work setting achieve desired goals (Gupta et al., 2000). Beesley and Cooper (2008) examined and categorised knowledge and its meaning into two ultimate paradigms. The first paradigm (as espoused from Polanyi’s tacit vs. explicit knowledge dimensions) views knowledge as a tangible asset that can be codified, stored, retrieved and shared by others as performance standards. On the other hand, the second paradigm concedes knowledge to be an intangible asset that gradually develops as a result of individuals’ mental activities and accumulated experiences. Whereas the first paradigm recognises the efforts of expert agents in the development of knowledge and knowledge management systems geared towards culture transformation, the seconds paradigm heightens the “humanness” nature of knowledge and recognises the contribution of individuals and their surrounding context in knowledge management initiatives (Khumalo and Baloyi, 2017; Beesley and Cooper, 2008). According to Schmidt (2014) Polanyi’s tacit vs. explicit knowledge dimension is seemingly not open to epistemic practices in which actors contextually interact to legitimise knowledge but rather open to didactic practices that promote expatriate influence and control over ordinary employees in their local work context.
Although the concept of codifying tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is considered to be playing an important role in knowledge management (Ichikawa and Steup, 2018), it is at the same time perceived to be paradoxical, as the resulting performance standards are not always compatible to the varied work contexts (Khumalo and Baloyi, 2017). In Africa, for example, knowledge is described as an epitome of skills and philosophies that are spontaneously developed by societies through interaction with the surrounding environment. Specifically, knowledge management in Africa is grounded on cultural values and folklore that would relate to the day-today events and activities, and it is maintained across generations (Mitiku et al., 2016). Given these circumstances, the application of knowledge and knowledge management practices that are built on explicit standardised frameworks (acquired from exotic cultures) would imply enormous transformation of cultural values, beliefs, attitudes and habits of Africans (Raza-Ullah, 2017). As a consequence the acquired knowledge...