Teadmised ja teadmiste juhtimine on üks sellistest igavikulistest küsimustest, millega organisatsioonid tegelevad, kui püüavad olla edukad. Sellised teadmised, mis meis kõigis on, kuid mida on keeruline kirjalikult vms moel väljendada (vaiketeadmised), võivad organisatsioonile (ja teistele sotsiaalsetele süsteemidele) osutuda väga kasulikuks. Küsimus on selles, kuidas neid teadmisi “kätte saada” või jagada? Mis siis, kui keskenduks asjade (= teadmised, inimesed) asemel nendevahelistele suhetele?
Siinviidatud artiklis on ajakirja valdkonnale asjakohane ambitsioon:

This study is important to the field of human resource development (HRD) as it engages with a fundamental and as yet under-researched HRD black-box. That is, what are the characteristics about relationships between individuals and how do these influence whether tacit knowledge is sought and knowledge flows between individuals which then facilitates learning. Our focus on knowledge seeking positions the learner as proactive in the learning process.

Uuringu teoreetilise raamistiku summeerivad autorid järgmiselt:

To progress this agenda, we focus on two avenues notably: tacit knowledge seeking as a distinct phase within the tacit knowledge sharing process, as this positions the learner as proactive in the learning process; and the role of social interaction and social relationships.

Kokkuvõttes märgivad autori muuhulgas järgmist:

This study utilizes the social capital lens to describe the development of the relational facets of trust, sanctions, and social identification and the impact on decisions to operationalize relationships for tacit knowledge seeking. As such, it draws on prominent social capital theorizing, which specifically pertains to relationship mechanisms of contacts, links, paths, networks, channels, which can be “used” to gain resources, like tacit knowledge (Andriessen & Gubbins, 2009). More specifically, once the “contacts,” “links,” “networks” are illuminated through the critical incidences cited, this study zones in on the relational mechanisms, which provide more substance to relationships and influences the extent to which their “use” delivers value, in this case tacit knowledge. […] The results of this study illuminate the complex relationship between social identification and decisions on “with whom”—the “in-group” or “out-group”—to operationalize a knowledge seeking relationship. This complexity consists of at least two issues: an observation by Brass et al. (2004) regarding the “duality” of “groups” and of individuals, because ties between people in different groups also create ties between units: teams, departments, or the organization. This result in layers of social identification or individuals identifying with different “groups” and thus with different consequences for tacit knowledge seeking.

Claire Gubbins; Lawrence Dooley. (2021) Delineating the tacit knowledge-seeking phaseof knowledge sharing: The influence of relationalsocial capital components. Human Resource Development Quarterly