A n E x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e Tr a n s - N a t i o n a l i t y a n d
Applicability of Nonaka’s Theory in the Knowledge
Management Context in the WestADACHI Yoshimichi
Abstract
This paper aims to examine the trans-nationality and applicability of Nonaka’s theory to the context ofknowledge management (KM) in the West. In order to accomplish this aim, a range of literature related to KM
in the West has been collected, presented and critiqued. Moreover, the discourse(s) of (the conceptualizationof) KM in the West has been identified and examined in terms of the integrated framework, presented in theprevious issue by the author. This has been done by utilizing an existing contents-analysis of journal article
abstracts presented by European scholars.
This analysis suggests that the (three) approaches to KM identified by Raub & Rüling in the West require
a much wider view of knowledge, one which incorporates Nonaka’s four modes of knowledge conversion
into their framework in a balanced way. In other words, it supported the possibility that Nonaka’s theory
offers a more comprehensive framework which covers all KM discourses in the West in a comprehensive
manner.
Key words: Knowledge, Knowledge Management, Nonaka’s theory, SECI model

2. Definitions and trends of knowledge management

1. Introduction
This paper aims to examine the trans-nationality

2.1 Definition of knowledge management

and applicability of Nonaka’s theory to the context

In spite of (or perhaps due to) the fact that KM hasof knowledge management (KM), by using theachieved considerable attention from academics andintegrated framework as criteria, which have beenpractitioners in the West over the decade, no unified

introduced in the previous issue of Yamanashi

definition of KM has as yet emerged. It seems that1）

Global Studies. In order to accomplish this aim, an

because of the complex and multifaceted nature

range of literature related to KM in the West hasof knowledge itself, the existing literature on KM

been collected, presented and critiqued. Moreover,defines knowledge according to the various authors’

the discourse(s) of (the conceptualization of) KM inconcerns about the topic. The following are somethe West is identified and examined in terms of theexamples of the definitions of KM:

integrated framework. This is done by utilizing an
existing contents-analysis of journal article abstracts◦Davenport & Prusak (1998): Knowledgepresented by European scholars. This will provide

management is the process of increasing thean opportunity to link Nonaka’s SECI model to theefficiency of knowledge markets by generating,discourse(s) of KM presented in existing literature

codifying, coordinating, and transferring knowledge

related to KM in the West.

◦ Alavi & Leidner (1999) : Knowledge management

山梨県立大学 国際政策学部 総合政策学科
Department of Policy Management, Faculty of Glocal Policy Management and Communications, Yamanashi Prefectural
University− 45 −

山梨国際研究山梨県立大学国際政策学部紀要

No. 7（2012）refers to a systemic and organizationallycreation of a journal devoted to KM (e.g. Journal of

specified process for acquiring, organizing andknowledge management) in addition to a number ofcommunicating both tacit and explicit knowledge ofother works specially concerned with the topic (seeemployees so that other employees may make use of

Journal of Information Technology, 2001, vo.16, for

it to be more effective and productive in their work

example).

◦Swan et al. (1999) : KM is defined very broadly,

Moreover, the appearance of several major

encompassing any processes and practices concerned

review articles on KM by researchers in the UK iswith the creation, acquisition, capture, sharing andtestimony to KM’s growing stature in the researchuse of knowledge, skills and expertise whether thesecommunity (see Blackler, 1995 (UK); Blackler etare explicitly labeled as ‘KM’ or not.

al., 1998 (UK); Scarbrough et al., 1999 (UK); Swanet al., 2001 (UK)). In addition to this, from 2000

Broadly speaking, from the above definitions,

onwards the European Conference on Organizational

KM is largely seen as an organizational process

knowledge, Learning, and Capability (OKLC)5）has

and practice both at individual and group levels

taken place every year, focusing on KM with an

and regards knowledge as a crucial resource

explicitly European focus as an attempt to integrate

for sustaining and achieving organizational

insights from a variety of disciplines and fields,competitiveness. It also includes a variety ofsuch as information systems management, strategic

activities such as knowledge creation, codification,

management, organization theory, marketing,sharing, coordination, and transfer, all of which areentrepreneurship, accounting and strands ofassociated with both tacit and explicit knowledge.

sociology, psychology, economics, and philosophy.6）

All the definitions provided are roughly consistent

Taking these facts together, it would be natural

with Nonaka’s theory, which values organizational

to suppose that KM promises to be a dominant

activities concerned with knowledge conversion

perspective with influence on both researchers andbetween tacit and explicit knowledge through social

practices in various fields throughout Europe.

interaction as the key for enhancing and sustaining
3. Examining knowledge management discourse(s)organizational advantage.

in the West

2.2 Proliferation of knowledge management in theWest

3.1 Contents-analysis of journal article abstracts
The sustained interest in KM and the rapid

KM has received widespread attention in the West.

proliferation of KM articles in the West raise an

For example, a keyword search in November 2011

important question associated with the researchon the web site of Amazon.co.uk generated 35,822

presented here. That is, whether or not the KM

hits for ‘knowledge management’ (c.f. Amazon.com

articles in the West have any affinity in their2）(USA) yielded 36,717 at the same words). It isconceptualization to Nonaka’s theory, or what theinteresting to make a comparison between the above

relationships in the perspective between KM inand Amazon.co.jp which found only 2,458 hits for thethe West, and Nonaka’s theory are. To address this,3）

words ‘knowledge management’ in Japanese. Thisit seems appropriate to base the examination on asuggests that the conceptualization (not practice)contents-analysis of journal article abstracts relatedof KM is to date a phenomenon found mainly in theto KM as a starting point, in order to grasp the KM

4）West. In the UK the early 1990s heralded interest

discourse(s) in a Western context and compare it

in KM and its continued popularity is evident by thewith the theoretical framework of Nonaka’s SECI

− 46 −

An Examination of the Trans-Nationality and Applicability of Nonaka’s Theory in the Knowledge Management Context in the Westmodel. However, owing to the limited research

example, they excluded articles related to KM thatin this field as a whole, greater emphasis is given

do not contain the term ‘knowledge management’ into the works produced by researchers in Europe;

their abstracts. Thirdly, although it is assumed thatnamely, Raub & Rüling (2001).

the databases used here provide a representative
sample which is relevant to the KM field in the

3.2 Methodological limitations

West, the articles in their databases may include

Raub & Rüling (2001) have comprehensively

those written by non-Western researchers.

e x a m i n e d K M t re n d s i n t h e We s t , u s i n g a

Although the kinds of limitations outlined above

number of journal articles linked to ‘knowledge

cannot ensure empirical rigour, the research

management’. The main original source was therequired for the paper will at least be able to track a

ABI/Inform database, an on-line journal, between

KM literature discourse(s) in the West.

1975 and 1998, in which 434 abstracts (including
article titles and article keywords) which hit the

3.3 Findings of Raub & Rüling’s research

key word ‘knowledge management’ were utilized

One of the main findings of Raub & Rüling’s dataas the research materials. Based on a preliminary

base analysis is that the authors identified thatanalysis of approximately one hundred randomly

there are at least two separate KM discourses

chosen articles, the authors inductively categorizedin accordance with the variable journal affiliationa certain number of variables that appeared to be ofrelated to KM; namely, an IS/IT-driven KM7） and atheoretical interest and analyzed the articles.

KM which focuses on issues of general managerial

It should be noted here that, as the authorsinterest (such as a management, human resources,

acknowledge, there are certain methodologicalmarketing or finance). The latter was labeled MGT-

limitations of database research of journal article

KM (general-management-oriented). Although thisabstracts. Firstly, the results of these analyses

term is somewhat vague, it seems to only mean thatare determined by the quality of the databases

which isn’t ‘IS/IT’. Table 1 displays seven content

themselves and this, for example, does not take into

variables that show a significant correlation with ataccount any books that may have significance inleast one of two journal groups. From the table, it

adding to the KM discourse(s). Secondly, the results

can be analyzed that the two discourses, or ratherof these analyses depend on the categorization. For

research communities, exist separately. Separate

Table1: Associations with ‘journal function’ (Source: Raub & Rüling, 2001)
Article content

Journal affiliation: IS/IT

Journal affiliation: MGT

IT systems

0.160**-0.123*IT tools

0.228**-0.178**Knowledge management tools

0.116*

Not significant

Learning-0.203**0.126*

Intellectual capital-0.166**

0.153**

Generic knowledge
management processes-0.105*0.134**

Strategic implications-0.145**0.113*

Spearman’s ρ, n-398.
*Correlation significant at the 0.5 level (two-tailed)**Correlation significant at the 0.1 level (two-tailed).

− 47 −

山梨国際研究山梨県立大学国際政策学部紀要

No. 7（2012）

journals examine each theme and issue related

one of the three elements ; IT systems, IT tools orwith KM with little overlapping or shared interest

knowledge management tools, it was coded IS/IT. If

and with little collaboration beyond researchat least one of the elements ; processes, intellectual

communities.

8）capital, measurement, strategic implications, human

Based on the journal database, Table 2 shows aresources implications, organizational implications

knowledge management discourse from a temporalor learning was mentioned, it was coded MGT.

perspective. If an article was mentioned at least

Articles mentioning neither of these topics wereTable2: Share of abstracts in terms of condensed
content categories (IS/IT vs. MGT)
(Source, Raub & Rüling, 2001)
Article year

1975(Count/percentage)
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1991
1992
1993

1998
Total

Total

This distinctive shift is consistent with the views
expressed by Swan et al. (2001) who view the shift

4

-

-

-

4

-

-

-

100.0

-

1

1

-

2

-

50.0

50.0

-

100.0

-

1

-

-

1

-

100.0

-

-

100.0

-

2

-

-

2

-

100.0

-

-

100.0

1

1

-

-

2

50.0

50.0

-

-

100.0

1

3

-

4

8

It is interesting to apply the findings of Raub &

12.5

37.5

-

50.0

100.0

Rüling to the integrated framework of the TEAM

1

2

-

1

4

linguistic structure and Nonaka’s SECI model (see

25.0

50.0

-

25.0

100.0

Figure 1).9）Figure 1 shows that the IS/IT community

1

1

1

-

3

33.3

33.3

33.3

-

100.0

-

2

-

-

2

-

100.0

-

-

100.0

language function of transmitting meaning in the

-

3

-

-

3

TEAM linguistic framework). This is because

-

100.0

-

-

100.0

it views knowledge as explicit, readily codified

-

2

-

-

2

-

100.0

-

-

100.0

as well as stored, say, in a computer, and easily

1

4

-

5

20.0

80.0

-

100.0

3

7

1

11

internalization modes (or the language functions of

27.3

63.6

9.1

100.0

accumulating and measuring meaning) (e.g. learning,

1995

1997

were dominated by IS/IT approaches, from 1994

100.0

1994

1996

that whilst before 1994 articles related to KM
to 1996 MGT articles dominated the KM debate.

Condensed content category Others IS/IT only MGT only IS/IT and MGT

coded others. From the table, it can be analyzed

as ‘a backlash of criticism against the ‘KM’ emphasison technology’. In 1997 and 1998 both categories
were represented on equal terms.
4. Examining knowledge management discourse(s)in the West in terms of Nonaka’s SECI model

4.1 Applying the analysis to the integrated framework

fall into the quadrant of the combination mode ofknowledge conversion in Nonaka’s terms (or thetransmitted to others. The MGT community may
be divided into the quadrants of socialization and

2

8

16

11

37

intellectual capital and strategic implication →

5.4

21.6

43.2

29.7

100.0

3

27

26

22

78

the internalization mode, generic knowledge

3.8

34.6

33.3

28.2

100.0

18

91

96

65

270

This is because it has to deal with the human,

6.7

33.7

35.6

24.1

100.0

context-specific and therefore tacit (implicit)

31

148

151

104

434

dimension of knowledge.

7.1

34.1

34.8

24.0

100.0

management processes → the socialization mode).

This suggests that the majority of the different− 48 −

An Examination of the Trans-Nationality and Applicability of Nonaka’s Theory in the Knowledge Management Context in the West

communities fail to adequately grasp the totality ofof knowledge, limiting its focus on the successfulthese diverse knowledge activities in a coherent andimplementation of IT. For example, Taylor et al.

comprehensive manner and highlight only a few of(2001), whose research is typical of the integrative

the aspects of Nonaka’s SECI model.

approach to KM, produced case study research of
the 25 organizations in the northwest of England,

4.2 The emergence of the integrative perspective andand identified a need for employees internalizing

its limitation

the skills and knowledge required for computer

The other interesting result from Raub &network support activities in order for IT tools to

Rüling’s (2001) analysis is the rise of an integrative

work effectively. The finding from this research isperspective between IS/IT implications andamply supported by Robey et al. (2000) who claim

managerial issues in KM articles which havethat the successful implementation of technologies

appeared from 1995 onwards (see Table 2). The

will depend on organizational learning capacity.

emergence of the integrative perspective between

Again, applying the integrated framework of

those offering different viewpoints implies that boththe TEAM linguistic framework and Nonaka’s

research communities in KM are communicating

SECI model to the arguments of the integrativein order to overcome their theoretical limitations

perspective of KM, the result is most interesting

and to find the better or more practical solutions to(Figure 2). Figure 2 suggests that the integrative

organization needs. However, a close look at thisperspective of KM mainly expands focus or interest

new approach shows it remains a narrow perspectivefrom the combination mode to the internalization

Explicitness(Externality)
Separation
betweentwo

communities

Identity(Space)

IS/IT community(Combination mode/ (Externalization mode/systemic knowledge)
conceptual knowledge)
Transmissive Expressive
Money Power
Measuring Accumulative
Value Role
Organizational
Generic knowledge
Learning
Management processes
Intellectual Capital
Strategic implications(Internalization mode/ (Socialization
mode/
Operational knowledge)
Sympathized knowledge)

Difference(Time)

Implicitness(Internality)
Figure 1: Relationship between two separated KM communities and Nonaka’s SECI model(Source: Author)− 49 −

山梨国際研究山梨県立大学国際政策学部紀要

No. 7（2012）

mode of knowledge conversion in order to derive

In other words, it supported the possibility that

benefit from a KM project. In other words, there is

Nonaka’s theory offers a more comprehensive

still a failure to adequately grasp the whole level offramework which covers all KM discourses in thethe knowledge activity in an organization, ignoringWest in a comprehensive manner.

aspects of the externalization mode and placing lessemphasis on the socialization mode as expressed in
Nonaka’s terms.

Notes１）In the previous paper (see Yamanashi Global Studies
No.6), in addition to the examination of the relationshipsof various concepts between Nonaka’s theory and5. Conclusionsorganization studies in the West, it also created an
integrated framework from the TEAM structure andThis paper has grasped the KM discourses
in the West which mainly focus on Information
Technologies and identified their limitations in

Nonaka’s SECI model (see p31 Figure 4-1).
２）c.f. the keyword search in May 2002 on the web siteof Amazon.co.uk gave rise to 557 hits for ‘knowledge

terms of the integrated framework of the TEAM

management’ (c.f. Amazon.com yields 617 at the same

linguistic framework and Nonaka’s SECI model.
This analysis suggests that the (three) approaches

words)
３）This includes the words ‘narreji manejimento’ (knowledge
management in Japanese)’ and ‘chishiki keiei’ (translated

to KM identified by Raub & Rüling (2001) in theWest require a much wider view of knowledge, one
which incorporates the four modes of knowledge

words of knowledge management into Japanese)
４）In addition, between 1989 and 2000, the EBSCO
Business Source Premier database comprised 1,397

conversion into their framework in a balanced way.

article abstracts that include the key words ‘knowledge

Explicitness(Externality)
Combination mode

Identity(Space)Territory of theintegrative
perspectiveof KM

Externalization mode

Transmissive Expressive
Money Power
Measuring Accumulative
Value Role
Socialization mode
Internalization mode

Difference(Time)

Training
Organizational capacity

Learning

Implicitness(Internality)
Figure2: Relationship between the IT driven integrative approach to KM and Nonaka’s SECI model(Source: Author)− 50 −

An Examination of the Trans-Nationality and Applicability of Nonaka’s Theory in the Knowledge Management Context in the Westmanagement’, within excess of 95% concentrated in the
4-years period from 1997 to 2000 (see Raub & Rüling,2001).
５）The conference changed the name to Organizational
Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities(OLKC)
６）The first OKLC was held in the University of Warwick
and the second in University of Leicester. The third
conference was organized outside the UK for the firsttime and took a more explicitly European focus. See theWeb-site http://www.alba.edu.gr/OKLC2002.
７）A IS/IT-driven KM is a KM approach which focuses on the‘Knowledge System’ constructed by Information System(IS) or Information Technology (IT).
８）That is, while IS/IT-oriented journals show a positive
correlation with the topics of IT systems, IT tools andknowledge management tools, they are negatively
correlated with the remaining content variables.
Conversely, while the MGT category of journals shows
positive correlations with mention of learning, intellectual
capital, processes and strategic implication, they are
negatively correlated with IT systems and IT tools.
９）Again, regarding the integrated framework of the TEAM
linguistic structure and Nonaka’s SECI model, see Figure
4-1 (p31) in Yamanashi Global Studies No.6

References
Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E. (1999), ‘Knowledge
management systems: issues, challenges, andbenefits’, Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, 1 (Article 7)
Alvesson, M. (1995), Management of KnowledgeIntensive Companies, Berlin/New York: De
Gruyter
Alvesson, M. & Kär reman, D. (2001), ‘Odd
couple: Making sense of the curious conceptof knowledge and management’, Journal ofManagement Studies, 38, 7, 995-1017
Blackler, F. (1995), ‘Knowledge, knowledge work andorganization: An overview and interpretation’,
Organization Studies, 16, 6, 1021
Blackler, F., Crump, N. & McDonald, S. (1998),‘Knowledge, organizations and competition’in von Krogh, G., Roos, J. & Kleine, D. (eds.)(1998), Knowing in Firms, London: Sage
Davenport, T.H., De Long, D.W. & Beers, M.C.
(1998), ‘Successful knowledge management
projects’, Sloan Management Review, 39, 2, 4357
Davenport, T.H. & Prusak, L. (1998), Working

Knowledge, Boston: Harvard Business School
Press
Feelders，A., Daniels，H. & Holsheimer, M. (2000),‘Methodological and practical aspects of data
mining’, Information & Management, 37, 271281
Grant, R. M. (1996b), ‘Prospering in dynamicallycompetitive environments: Organizational
capability as knowledge integration’,
Organization Science, 7, 4, 375-387
Johannessen, J-A., Olaisen, J. & Olsen, B. (2001),‘Mismanagement of tacit knowledge: theimportance of tacit knowledge, the dangerof information technology, and what to doabout it’, International Journal of Information
Management, 21, 3-20
Journal of Information Technology, 2001, vo.16
Leonard, D. & Sensiper, S. (1998), ‘The role of tacitknowledge in group innovation’, California
Management Review, Summer, 32-41
Newell, S., Scarbrough, H. & Swan, J. (2001), ‘From
global knowledge management to internal
electronic fences: Contradictory outcomesof intranet development’, British Journal ofManagement, 12, 97-111
Nishibe, S. (1996), Structure of Intelligence, Tokyo:
Kadokawa Haruki jimusyo
Nonaka, I. (1991), ‘The knowledge-creatingcompany’ Harvard Business Review, NovemberDecember, 96-104
N o n a k a , I . ( 1 9 9 4 ) , ‘A d y n a m i c t h e o r y o forganizational knowledge creation’ Organization
Science, 5, 1, 14-37
Pentland, B.T. & Rueter, H.H. (1994), ‘Organizationalroutines as grammars of action’, Administrative
Science Quarterly, 39, 3, 484-510
Raub, S. & Rüling, C-C. (2001), ‘The knowledge
management tussle - speech communities andrhetorical strategies in the development ofknowledge management’, Journal of Information
Technology, 16, 113-130
Robertson, M., Sorenson, C. & Swan, J. (2000),‘ Fa c i l i t a t i n g k n o w l e d g e c r e a t i o n w i t hgroup ware: A case study of a knowledge
intensive firm, Proceedings of the 33rd HawaiiInternational Conference on System Sciences
Robey, D., Boudreau, M-C. & Rose, G.M. (2000),‘Information technology and organizational
learning: A review and assessment of research’− 51 −

山梨国際研究山梨県立大学国際政策学部紀要

No. 7（2012）

Accounting, Management and Information
Technologies, 10, 2, 125-155
Ru g g l e s I I I , R . L . ( e d . ) ( 1 9 9 7 ) , K n o w l e d g eManagement Tools, Oxford, Butter worthHeinemann
Scarbrough, H. & Swan, J. (2001), ‘Explain the
diffusion of knowledge management: The roleof fashion’, British Academy of Management, 12,
3-12
Scarbrough, H., Swan, J. & Preston, J. (1999),
Knowledge Management: A Review of the
Literature, London: Institute of Personnel andDevelopment
Starbuck, W. H. (1992), ‘Learning by knowledgeintensive firms’, Journal of Management Studies,29, 6, 713-740
Swan, J., Newell, S. & Robertson, M. (2000), ‘Limitsof IT –driven knowledge management andinitiatives for interactive innovation processes:
Towards a community- based approach’,
Proceedings of the 33 rd Hawaii International
Conference on System Science
Swan, J., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H. & Hislop,
D. (1999), ‘Knowledge management andinnovation: Networks and networking’, Journalof Knowledge Management, 3, 4, 262-275
Swan, J., Robertson, M. & Bresnen, M. (2001),‘Knowledge management and colonizationof knowledge’, Electronic Journal of Radical
Organization Theory, 7, 2
Taylor, M. J., Gresty, D. & Askwith, R. (2001),‘Knowledge for network support’, Informationand Software Technology, 43, 469-475
Venzin, M., von Krogh, G. & Roos, J. (1998), ‘Future
research into knowledge management’ in vonKrogh, G., Roos, J. & Kleine, D. (eds.) (1998),
Knowing in Firms, London: Sage
Walsham, G. (2001), ‘Knowledge management: The
benefits and limitations of computer systems’,
European Management Journal, 19, 6, 599-608
Z o l l o , M . & . W i n t e r, S . G . ( 1 9 9 9 ) , ‘ Fr o morganizational routine to dynamic capabilities’
systems’, A Working Paper of the Reginald H.
Jones Center, The Wharton School, Universityof Pennsylvania− 52 −