Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics in Higher Education Institutions

Full text

Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit
Knowledge Sharing Among Academics
in Higher Education Institutions
Rexwhite Tega Enakrire(B)and Hanlie Smuts
Department of Informatics, School of Information Technology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria,
South Africa
rexwhite.enakrire80@gmail.com, hanlie.smuts@up.ac.za
Abstract. Trust plays a pivotal role in contemporary higher education settings.
Trust is an intangible asset that is cultivated and maintained among individu-
als. However, there is concern regarding certain academics within higher educa-
tion institutions (HEIs) who demonstrate unfaithfulness by appropriating others’
insights or tacit knowledge for their research papers, projects, innovations, grant
writing, and career advancement, as outlined by the authors. This behaviour raises
questions about the perception of such actions among academics, who are intel-
lectuals capable of developing their tacit knowledge through diligent research and
exploration. This concern underscores the need for this study to examine trust as a
determinant in tacit knowledge sharing among academics in HEIs. Two research
objectives were used to address the study, namely: to establish the role of trust
in tacit knowledge sharing, and to explore factors that may hinder not having
trust in tacit knowledge sharing among academics. The study employed qualita-
tive content analysis and phenomenological research approaches. Findings from
the empirical literature harvested and the researchers’ experiences revealed that
trust significantly impacts tacit knowledge sharing among academics, particularly
when issues such as jealousy, rivalry, and competition are set aside. Findings fur-
ther reveal that tacit knowledge emerges as beneficial, especially when academics
collaborate for professional growth and institutional advancement. Various fac-
tors, including limited time of interaction among colleagues, job insecurity, the
dominance of explicit knowledge over tacit knowledge sharing, educational and
experiential disparities, poor communication skills, age and gender discrepancies,
lack of social networks, and cultural differences, can impede trust in tacit knowl-
edge sharing among academics in HEIs. The study recommends fostering thought-
provoking discussions and continuous engagement among academics from diverse
backgrounds to enhance trust and facilitate more effective tacit knowledge sharing
in the future within HEIs.
Keywords: Trust ·Tacit ·Knowledge ·Sharing ·Higher Education Institutions ·
productivity ·interpersonal skills
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
L. Uden and I.-H. Ting (Eds.): KMO 2024, CCIS 2152, pp. 51–60, 2024.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63269-3_4

52 R. T. Enakrire and H. Smuts
1 Introduction
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have evolved into enterprises where the dissemina-
tion of information and knowledge is vital for societal transformation and development.
The acknowledgement of the significance of information and knowledge in societal
advancement has led academics to recognize its importance, resulting in a reluctance to
share tacit knowledge with colleagues within HEIs. Academics within HEIs are appre-
hensive that sharing their tacit knowledge could be exploited by colleagues for personal
gain, such as developing research papers/projects, innovations, course materials, secur-
ing grants, or advancing their careers. The apprehension stems from concerns about
potential betrayal, where colleagues might appropriate ideas for their benefit. The authors
of this paper question why colleagues, who are also academics with extensive training
and experience, cannot cultivate their tacit knowledge through ongoing exploration and
discovery. Drawing from their combined experience of over ten years in HEIs, the authors
have observed instances where sharing thoughts, innovations, and ideas with other aca-
demics has led to those ideas being claimed by colleagues in published research papers
or seminars. This phenomenon may arise from a lack of time or motivation to implement
the ideas, prompting this study to explore methods of fostering trust among academics
for the sharing of tacit knowledge within HEIs.
The study by [1] indicates that the activities surrounding teaching learning and
research in HEIs are essential roles that require certain knowledge and skills before
academics can dominate in the tasks given to them. Therefore, since the tasks of teaching-
learning, and research in HEIs are complex and uncertain as stipulated by [1], guiding
tacit knowledge with the attribution of trust becomes significant. The thought of the
authors in this regard is that it takes years, rigorous study, and experiences to build
tacit knowledge and the essence of sharing it is to enhance organisational productivity
and career growth among academics. The ownership of any tacit knowledge is willing
and prepared to share if it is not going to be stolen or used for other selfish purposes.
[1] note that Tacit knowledge has proven to be the panacea to organizational problems
[2], because of hidden expertise in the human brain/mind. The hidden know-how in
the human brain/mind is unveiled when activities take place in HEIs. Tacit knowledge
sharing is an enabler that results in quality service delivery in HEIs [1].
[3] notes that tacit knowledge comprises insights, innovations, human behaviour,
intelligence, and fresh ideas that are products of organizational sustainability. The
insights, innovations, human behaviour, intelligence, and fresh ideas cannot work in
isolation, but rather through human effort. Trust is an intangible asset that is created,
developed, and sustained by and among people [4]. Trust is an antecedent to knowl-
edge sharing [4]. Trust is a key factor when it comes to building relationships. Without
trust among academics, it would be difficult to work together as team members, how
much more sharing tacit type of knowledge (hidden treasure). Therefore, for academics
to share tacit knowledge there is a need to build relationships. Building a relation-
ship among academics is crucial because it would help to strengthen the part to follow
whenever academics want to share the tacit type of knowledge for their work practices.
While academics display their trust, it becomes much easier to share tacit knowledge
when executing any tasks in HEIs. Tacit knowledge application is significant in the actu-
alisation of work performance in the HEIs. The accomplishments made thus far among

Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics 53
academics, especially in their teaching and learning, research, attending workshops and
conferences and other extracurricular activities within HEIs result in employing tacit
knowledge for proper planning, and decision-making among academics. The tacit type
of knowledge that resonates for the success of events in HEIs is predictable and valued
based on the trust that academics have for each other in their job performance [4]. This
trust has given birth to a resounding and informative renovation and expansion within
the HEIs circle. The focus of this paper therefore investigates trust as a determining
factor in tacit knowledge in enhanced quality service delivery in organizations.
The paper applied the qualitative content analysis and the phenomenological research
approaches using the authors’ lived experiences and expositions in their careers in devel-
oping this paper. The adopted research approaches have helped to address the role of
trust that tacit knowledge has played in knowledge sharing among academics. The paper
reflects that when there is trust, academics may be willing to share their tacit knowl-
edge (knowledge in the human brain) to support HEIs transformation and inculcation of
insights that could boost academic growth. The identified variables “sharing tacit knowl-
edge and trust” buttressed in this context become significant in the present knowledge
economy where both entities are imperative for the sustainable development of HEIs.
This paper aims to understand how trust could be used as a determining factor in
tacit knowledge sharing among academics in HEIs. To develop the study further, two
research objectives were used to address the study, namely: to establish the role of trust
in tacit knowledge sharing, and to explore factors that may hinder not having trust in
tacit knowledge sharing among academics.
In Sect. 2, the background of the study was presented where the overview of empirical
studies of trust in tacit knowledge sharing was discussed, followed by Sect. 3which
addresses the method applied in the study. Section 4entails the findings/contribution of
the study, while Sect. 5connotes the implication of the study and 6 is the conclusion of
the paper.
2 Background
Tacit knowledge has become a key component through which academics could survive
especially in this era of the fifth industrial revolution (5IR). The 5IR encompasses human
interaction with machines (AI). While AI has infiltrated everywhere inclusive HEIs, the
use of tacit knowledge among academics cannot be undermined. The survival strategy
of academics has to do with the application of tacit knowledge for enhanced service
delivery in HEIs. Tacit knowledge could assist academics in this world of uncertainty,
where artificial intelligence (AI) is gradually taking over job opportunities. As academics
engage in one task or the other where they discuss with each other, they share their tacit
knowledge to enhance work performance and academic capability. This is also supported
by [2] who attests that most activities experienced in corporate and private organizations
were the effort of tacit knowledge. Sharing tacit knowledge among academics leads
to innovative work performance of tasks exhibited [1]. Academics indicate that before
they can share their tacit knowledge with their colleagues, there should be some level
of trust. The reason that necessitates this assertion is that tacit knowledge, hidden in the
human brain/mind, has become an enabler in quality service delivery in organizations. [4]

54 R. T. Enakrire and H. Smuts
notes that Knowledge Sharing and Trust are concepts that have been explored by many
researchers such as [2,4]. [4] believed that it is important to trust someone whenever
knowledge is shared. For example, when a sick person visits the doctor at the hospital
regarding a certain ailment or sickness, it is believed that the knowledge that was shared
between the doctor and the sick person should not be shared on the public notice of the
hospital.
The reason why such knowledge should not be shared is because it is confidential
knowledge similar to the tacit type of knowledge. Another example we could also learn
from is interviewing respondents in a research investigation or a journalist. The tacit type
of knowledge which the respondents or the journalist shared must be kept at a closed door,
to maintain ethical standards, otherwise, the person seeking such information has bridged
the oat that guides against knowledge protection. The information and knowledge given
out to the person seeking it must be protected, except on request for concrete reasons.
The cases referred to in this context are distinct and serve different purposes but the
bottom line that the authors seek to drive home is the ability to trust someone whenever
tacit knowledge being hidden type of knowledge or confidential knowledge is shared.
While one of the authors was working at a certain University in Africa whose identity
cannot be revealed due to ethical reasons, he conceived an idea or innovation to carry
out a community project in one of the communities, before writing the proposal on
the community project, he decided to share the thought of the project with another
colleague and during the discussion, they both discussed intellectually and laughed very
well about it. Surprisingly, the other colleague who never had or planned any initiative
decided to bypass the colleague who owns the original plans and submitted the same
idea of the project to the necessary office for approval. When it was the turn of the
earlier colleague who had the actual project, the officer in charge said you may not
carry out this community project as someone had already submitted a similar project.
For curiosity’s sake, the colleague in question decided to ask, can I please know who
has such a brilliant idea for a community project? The officer then mentioned the name
of the colleague. When he saw the name of the person that submitted the proposal
he became shattered and furious. He quickly went to meet him and asked why he did
that, by stealing my idea for this project and even if you had such a thing in mind we
could have collaborated. This attitude shows some level of distrust and betrayal among
academics. As intellectuals, it is expected that there is no need to betray your colleague
as trust is valuable in life, no matter the circumstance. It is on this premise the authors
decided to carry out phenomenological research that understudies trust as a determining
factor in tacit knowledge sharing among academics in HEIs. This study fills the existing
knowledge gap of tacit knowledge sharing in the context of the knowledge management
domain and the contextual paradigm of a phenomenological approach in HEIs.
3 Research Method
To achieve the aim of this study, the researchers employed the qualitative content anal-
ysis of documents harvested from Google Scholar and phenomenological approaches.
The researchers harvested fifty research papers from Google Scholars in developing the
research papers. Of the fifty research papers harvested from Google Scholar, the inclusion

Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics 55
and exclusion criteria were applied to determine the papers most suited for consideration
using the keywords “role of trust in tacit knowledge sharing”, and “factors that may hin-
der not having trust in tacit knowledge sharing among academics. The research papers
left were twenty-five, which the researchers also used in the qualitative content analysis
where they internalised salient issues that have to do with the two research objectives
earlier mentioned in this segment. The phenomenological research method was also
considered in support of the qualitative content analysis of documents harvested from
Google Scholar for the study. These methods were considered appropriate due to their
efficacy in comprehending the lived experiences and insights of the researchers working
in diverse HEIs. The phenomenological research approach facilitated an understanding
of the lived experiences and insights the researchers have towards utilizing shared tacit
knowledge in developing research papers or grant projects. It also shed light on instances
where individuals were unapologetic when confronted about their behaviour. Previous
studies by [5] and [6] assert that the phenomenological approach is dedicated to sys-
tematically investigating personal experiences based on individuals’ lifestyles, career
trajectories, and societal impacts, which can serve as references or sources of inspira-
tion. The authors of this study chose the phenomenological research approach based on
their expertise in knowledge management, where tacit knowledge holds significance.
This approach was further supported by a qualitative content analysis of empirical
literature [7] sourced from the Google Scholar database [8]. Several studies, including
thoseby[5,9–11], and [6], have applied the phenomenological research approach, aug-
mented by content analysis. The authors concluded that this approach, along with content
analysis, offers a deeper understanding of internalized literature and the lived experi-
ences related to various phenomena. In this study, the authors analyzed their personal
lives and social environments. Their experiences regarding how trust facilitated tacit
knowledge sharing in HEIs bolstered their career progression. The subsequent section
discusses the findings and implications of the study, anchored in the phenomenological
approach and the authors’ lived experiences in HEIs, particularly their career progression
track records. The emphasis is on how academics can cultivate trust among themselves
to foster continued tacit knowledge sharing. This is followed by an exploration of fac-
tors that could impede trust and the role of tacit knowledge in enhancing the quality of
service delivery within organizations.
4 Findings and Implication of the Study
This study investigated trust as a pivotal determinant of tacit knowledge sharing among
academics in HEIs. This section presents the study’s findings and implications regarding
the roles that trust plays in tacit knowledge sharing. The findings were derived from a
phenomenological approach, incorporating the authors’ lived experiences and insights
supplemented by a content analysis of empirical literature sourced from the Google
Scholar database. The study also examined various factors that could potentially impede
trust in tacit knowledge sharing among academics, such as time constraints, job security
concerns, the prevalence of explicit knowledge sharing over tacit knowledge, disparities
in experience levels, and insufficient time for interpersonal contact were considered in
the study.

56 R. T. Enakrire and H. Smuts
4.1 Role of Trust in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics
Considering who to share tacit knowledge with, trust must be established in this world of
uncertainty. Many people have fallen victim to betrayal due to the knowledge they have
shared with others. Therefore for academics being knowledge producers in HEIs to share
their tacit knowledge with their colleagues, it is imperative to consider trust hence this
study becomes significant in this context. [12] note that the levels of trust meaningfully
influence the degree to which academics are eager to share and employ tacit knowledge.
Affect-based trust remarkably impacts the readiness to share tacit knowledge, while
perception-based trust plays a more substantial role in the willingness to utilize tacit
knowledge [12].
In this segment of the paper, the term “role” pertains to the actions academics can
take to foster the establishment of trust within HEIs. Trust plays a crucial role in facili-
tating tacit knowledge sharing among academics, as it forms the foundation upon which
relationships can be built and strengthened within HEIs. Trust is believed to promote
various forms of support among academics, including willingness, openness, and eager-
ness to share tacit knowledge. It enables academics to demonstrate love, support, men-
torship, management, and service towards each other within HEIs. Importantly, trust
transcends considerations of race, religion, background, class, and educational qualifi-
cations, thereby promoting diversity and inclusion, where everyone collaborates as team
members. From an organizational perspective, the role of trust in tacit knowledge sharing
is invaluable, as it safeguards job security, mitigates difficult situations, and simplifies
complexities that could potentially endanger the organization and its staff members.
Tacit knowledge plays a pivotal role in enhancing organizational productivity. Often,
academics possess a wealth of knowledge that remains concealed until they are assigned
specific tasks. Through engagement in these tasks, their knowledge gradually reveals
itself through their actions. One prominent framework highlighting the significance of
tacit knowledge is the SECI model [13]. Trust is viewed as a fundamental aspect of
human social interaction that develops over time. This concept extends across various
disciplines within the social sciences [14]. In the literature, trust is recognized as a
relational phenomenon that evolves through interactions between parties [15].
The SECI model [13] holds significance in this context as it facilitates academics’
socialization through knowledge sharing during interactions. Another crucial aspect
when dealing with the role of trust in tacit knowledge is externalization, which involves
the conversion of tacit to explicit knowledge [16]. How do academics see the other exter-
nal individual when it comes to building trust with such a person? Building trust could
only be achieved by both external factors of willingness and continuous engagement in
interaction, then the academic would come to know the person better. Additionally, it
is essential to consider combination (conversion of explicit to explicit knowledge) [17],
and internalization, which involves converting explicit to tacit knowledge [13]. Research
[2] suggests that tacit knowledge fosters innovation, ideas, and creativity, leading to the
development of innovative projects and enhancing work performance. Tacit knowledge,
encompassing innovation, ideas, and creativity emerging from academic discourse, can
be attributed to experiences and knowledge accumulated over the years. Once trust is
established, sharing tacit knowledge becomes seamless. The global innovation witnessed
in HEIs today is a result of academics collaborating as teams and the trust they have

Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics 57
built over time, thereby transforming organizations. This reflects the authors’ experi-
ence throughout their careers, where they have converted explicit knowledge to tacit and
vice versa for teaching and learning, research production, collaborations, and network-
ing with international colleagues. The authors emphasize the significance of building
trust by sharing tacit knowledge acquired over the years, as this knowledge defines their
expertise in their respective professions. The extent to which academics trust each other
correlates with the wellness, productivity, and international recognition of HEIs.
Reference [18] discusses the reduction of uncertainty and the collective integration of
organizational knowledge. It posits that tacit knowledge plays a crucial role in resolving
uncertainty that would otherwise be challenging to address. The influence of organi-
zational culture, as highlighted in [19], is paramount as it dictates the organization’s
potential for growth regardless of the context. In HEIs, the presence of well-cultivated
academic cultures facilitates easier and more effective sharing of tacit knowledge. Refer-
ence [20] emphasizes the importance of reconciling different academic perspectives, par-
ticularly in areas of agreement or disagreement stemming from diverse beliefs, insights,
and expertise. Academics leverage their beliefs, insights, and expertise to ensure the
dissemination of valid and appropriate knowledge within HEIs. The significance of trust
in tacit knowledge sharing becomes particularly pronounced when disagreements arise
among academics regarding the terms associated with their tasks.
4.2 Factors that Could Interfere with Trust in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among
Academics
Certain factors such as time to share knowledge, apprehension regarding job security, the
dominance of sharing explicit knowledge over tacit knowledge, differences in experience
levels, lack of time for contact and interaction, poor verbal and interpersonal skills, age
and gender differences, lack of social network, differences in education levels, fear of
not receiving recognition, and cultural differences. These factors are fundamental in the
interference of trust in tacit knowledge sharing among academics. The authors might
want to ask how can academics share tacit knowledge when there is competition among
each other. Competition is created in HEIs to render quality services and meet HEIs
goals, most academics do not have time for each other especially those who are in their
tenure track position requiring time and much effort to create substantive records in their
career progression.
Tacit knowledge is key to HEIs productivity, especially when academics play their
roles well. Most of what academics know (knowledge) is hidden until a certain task is
given. The tasks begin to reveal the knowledge that can only be achieved when given
tasks where they share what they know. For instance, attending conferences to present
papers, during faculty defence of masters and doctoral students. One amazing emphasis
that could last and position academics very well is revealed in the test of time through
[13] tacit knowledge embedded in the SECI model [13]. [21] emphasized that when
academics execute any tasks, what happens at that time is knowledge-generation and
processes where they create new knowledge through their product design and service
delivery. Nonaka, studies [22–24] have stood the test of time through various use of
the SECI model that explains the practicality of tacit knowledge application in service
delivery. The skillfulness of academics is used through tacit knowledge to accumulate

58 R. T. Enakrire and H. Smuts
every information resource used in their teaching and learning in HEIs. What about
countless research papers produced today hence HEIs place much value on research,
teaching and services because most of what academics do is embedded in their tacit type
of knowledge. The SECI model [13] has a lot to say about how tacit knowledge is shared
among academics, especially, when socializing (sharing experiences and interacting with
employees through tacit knowledge) [16] externalizing (conversion of tacit to explicit)
[16], combination (explicit renewed to explicit knowledge) [17], and internalization
(converting explicit to tacit knowledge) [13]. [25] alludes that tacit knowledge being
innovation, ideas, and creativity of academics could lead to the development of several
projects.
The tacit knowledge is the innovation, ideas, and creativity that emanate from the
discourse of individual expertise. It can also be attributed to experiences and knowledge
acquired over the years among employees on what they know best. This has been the
experience of the authors throughout their career progression having worked in different
private and public organizations in Africa, where they converted explicit knowledge to
tacit and vice versa. The reason the authors of this paper felt the qualitative content
analysis of literature and phenomenological research approach is more appropriate in
this study is aligned with where they showcase their thoughts and experiences on how
tacit knowledge remains an enabler of organizational productivity. The extent to which
employees can tell how much know-how they possess and have acquired reflects on
knowledge application in the production of knowledge. Tacit knowledge could be used
to quantify production of goods and services in this ever-changing world of uncertainty.
5 Implication of the Study
The implication of the study is that trust in tacit knowledge holds fundamental signifi-
cance across all spheres of human endeavour. Tacit knowledge serves as the embodiment
of an individual’s voice within an organization, through which their capabilities and con-
tributions are recognized. Without tacit knowledge, it becomes challenging to discern
what an academic’s potential is, predominantly in showcasing their talents and best
practices amidst an ever-evolving HEIs landscape. In today’s dynamic corporate envi-
ronment, the vitality of organizations hinges on the collective know-how possessed by
their employees. A deficiency in employee know-how poses a serious impediment to
organizational functioning and service delivery, whether in the private or public sector.
The strength of academics in HEIs is intricately linked to the knowledge carriers—i.e.,
the academics who demonstrate their expertise through their actions. The qualitative
content analysis of documents harvested from Google Scholar and the phenomenolog-
ical approaches adopted in this study has underscored the indispensable nature of tacit
knowledge in organizational survival. In an era of uncertainty and escalating customer
information needs, leveraging the hidden treasure of tacit knowledge becomes impera-
tive for organizational competitiveness. One of the key roles of trust in tacit knowledge
sharing identified in this study is its capacity to harness, tap into, and share among
academics for future generations. This fosters confidence among HEI management in
retaining the academics for future business enterprises. Quality service delivery in both
public and private organizations, concerning the application of tacit knowledge, entails

Trust as a Determining Factor in Tacit Knowledge Sharing Among Academics 59
serving customers promptly and with utmost respect and priority. Furthermore, fostering
a culture of collaboration and continuous teamwork among employees is crucial. The
productivity and performance of corporate and private organizations globally are largely
driven by the application of tacit knowledge in various activities and tasks. Therefore,
recognizing and leveraging the role of tacit knowledge is paramount for organizational
success and sustainability in today’s competitive landscape.
6 Conclusion
The study underscores the indispensable role of trust in tacit knowledge sharing among
academics in HEIs for achieving enhanced quality service delivery, a facet that cannot
be overstated. In today’s dynamic context, no organization can thrive without leveraging
tacit knowledge across various service delivery domains. The tacit knowledge exhib-
ited by employees varies according to their job roles and areas of expertise. The study
highlights that organizational resilience heavily relies on the capabilities of employ-
ees to apply their know-how effectively in their tasks. Furthermore, the study suggests
that as employees share their knowledge, they not only contribute to filtering outdated
information but also acquire new insights crucial for improving service quality. In an
ever-evolving economy where uncertainty prevails and customer demands escalate, orga-
nizations must devise strategic measures to endure. Harnessing the latent potential of
tacit knowledge, especially in young and competitive organizations, is deemed essential
for sustainability.
It is suggested that by sharing their hidden treasures of deep tacit knowledge, as iden-
tified in the study, both academics and HEIs can thrive. While emphasizing the pivotal
role of trust in tacit knowledge sharing for improved service delivery in HEIs among
academics, the study acknowledges contextual disparities and underscores the impera-
tive to harness, tap into, and share the wealth of knowledge stored within employees.
The study further underscores the monumental impact of tacit knowledge, attributing
its contributions to the development of cutting-edge technologies prevalent today. Con-
sequently, the study advocates for the promotion and showcasing of tacit knowledge to
accomplish tasks effectively. Nonetheless, a limitation of this research lies in the scant
exploration of African private and public organizations. There exists a notable gap in the
literature concerning the methodological approaches and theoretical frameworks regard-
ing the application of tacit knowledge in organizations, which this study endeavours to
address. In terms of future research, acknowledging the diverse interest of building trust
with non-academic staff members in higher education becomes significant considering
their tacit knowledge roles in supporting activities that go on in HEIs.
References
1. Enakrire, R.T., Smuts, H.: Efficacy of knowledge and skills in teaching and learning
and research in higher education institutions. In: International Conference on Knowledge
Management in Organizations, pp. 16–24. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2022)
2. Alzoubi, M.O., Alrowwad, A.A., Masa’deh, R.E.: Exploring the relationships among tacit
knowledge sharing, communities of practice and employees’ abilities: the case of KADDB
in Jordan. Int. J. Organizat. Analy. 30(5), 1132–1155 (2022)

60 R. T. Enakrire and H. Smuts
3. Malik, S.: Emotional intelligence and innovativework behaviour in knowledge-intensive orga-
nizations: how tacit knowledge sharing acts as a mediator? VINE J. Info. Knowle. Manage.
Sys. 52(5), 650–669 (2022)
4. McNeish, J., Mann, I.J.S.: Knowledge sharing and trust in organizations. IUP J. Knowl.
Manage. 8(2010)
5. Tomkins, L.: Using interpretative phenomenological psychology in organisational research
with working carers. In: Brook, J., King, N. (eds.), Applied Qualitative Research in
Psychology, pp. 86–100. Palgrave, London (2017)
6. Noon, E.J.: Interpretive phenomenological analysis: An appropriate methodology for educa-
tional research. J. Perspect. Appl. Acad. Pract. 6(1) (2018)
7. Given, L.M.: The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, vols. 1–0. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. (2008)
8. Greening, N.: Phenomenological research methodology. Sci. Res. J. 7(5), 88–92 (2019)
9. Smith, J.A., Flower, P., Larkin, M.: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory,
Method and Research. Qualitative Research in Psychology 6(4), 346–347 (2009)
10. VanScoy, A., Evenstad, S.B.: Interpretative phenomenological analysis for LIS research.
Journal of Documentation (2015)
11. VanScoy,A., Bright, K.: Articulating the experience of uniqueness and difference for librarians
of color. Libr. Q. 89(4), 285–297 (2019)
12. Holste, J.S., Fields, D.: Trust and tacit knowledge sharing and use. J. Knowle. Manage. 14(1),
128–140
13. Nonaka, I.: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation, pp. 14–23. Hitotsub-
ashi University, Kunitachi, Tokyo, Japan, Institute of Business Research (1994)
14. Möllering, G., Bachmann, R., Hee, Lee, S.: Introduction: Understanding organizational trust–
foundations, constellations, and issues of operationalization. J. Manager. Psychol. 19(6),
556–570
15. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An integrative model of organizational trust
Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734 (1995). Gill, H., Boies, K., Finegan, J.E.,
Mcnally, J. 301
16. Farnese, M.L., Barbieri, B., Chirumbolo, A., Patriotta, G. Managing knowledge in organiza-
tions: A Nonaka’s SECI model operationalization. Frontiers in Psychology 10(2730) (2019).
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02730
17. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., Konno, N.: SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic
knowledge creation. Long Range Plan. 33(1), 5–34 (2000)
18. O ˘guz, F., Elif ¸Sengün, A.: Mystery of the unknown: revisiting tacit knowledge in the
organizational literature. J. Knowl. Manag. 15(3), 445–461 (2011)
19. Mambo, S., Smuts, H.: The impact of organizational culture on knowledge management: the
case of an international multilateral organization. EPiC Series in Comp. 85, 184–195 (2022)
20. Muñoz, C.A., Mosey, S., Binks, M.: The tacit mystery: reconciling different approaches to
tacit knowledge. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 13, 289–298 (2015)
21. Nonaka, I., Byosiere, P., Borucki, C.C., Konno, N.: Organizational knowledgecreation theory:
a first comprehensive test. Int. Bus. Rev. 3(4), 337–351 (1994)
22. Andreeva, T., Ikhilchik, I.: Applicability of the SECI model of knowledge creation in Russian
cultural context: theoretical analysis. Knowl. Process. Manag. 18(1), 56–66 (2011)
23. Adesina, A.O., Ocholla, D.N.: The SECI model in knowledge management practices: past,
present and future. Mousaion 37(3) (2019)
24. Canonico, P., De Nito, E., Esposito, V., Iacono, M.P., Consiglio, S.: Knowledge creation in
the automotive industry: analysing obeya-oriented practices using the SECI model. J. Bus.
Res. 112, 450–457 (2020)
25. Mitchell, V.W., Harvey, W.S., Wood, G.: Where does all the ‘know how’go? the role of tacit
knowledge in research impact. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 41(5), 1664–1678 (2022)