The Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 0022-3980 (Print) 1940-1019 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20

Tacit Knowledge in Academia: A Proposed Model

and Measurement Scale

Nancy Leonard & Gary S. Insch

To cite this article: Nancy Leonard & Gary S. Insch (2005) Tacit Knowledge in Academia: A
Proposed Model and Measurement Scale, The Journal of Psychology, 139:6, 495-512, DOI:
10.3200/JRLP.139.6.495-512

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JRLP.139.6.495-512

Published online: 07 Aug 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 222

View related articles

Citing articles: 16 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjrl20

Download by: [Quaid-i-azam University] Date: 11 October 2017, At: 01:57

 The Journal of Psychology, 2005, 139(6), 495–512
Copyright © 2005 Heldref Publications

Tacit Knowledge in Academia:

A Proposed Model and Measurement Scale
NANCY LEONARD
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

GARY S. INSCH
College of Business and Economics
West Virginia University

ABSTRACT. The authors propose a multidimensional model of tacit knowledge and

develop a measure of tacit knowledge in academia. They discuss the theory and extant lit-
erature on tacit knowledge and propose a 6-factor model. Experiment 1 is a replication of
a recent study of academic tacit knowledge using the scale developed and administered at
an Israeli university (A. Somech & R. Bogler, 1999). The results of the replication dif-
fered from those found in the original study. For Experiment 2, the authors developed a
domain-specific measure of academic tacit knowledge, the Academic Tacit Knowledge
Scale (ATKS), and used this measure to explore the multidimensionality of tacit knowl-
edge proposed in the model. The results of an exploratory factor analysis (n = 142) fol-
lowed by a confirmatory factor analysis (n = 286) are reported. The sample for both
experiments was 428 undergraduate students enrolled at a large public university in the
eastern United States. Results indicated that a 5-factor model of academic tacit knowledge
provided a strong fit for the data.
Key words: academic tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge

MUCH OF THE KNOWLEDGE used to succeed in school, work, and life is

acquired implicitly without the intention to learn or even the awareness that we
have learned something. Polanyi (1962, 1966) coined the phrase tacit knowledge
to describe this type of learning. In discussing knowledge that is difficult to put
into words, he stated that “ . . . we know more than we can tell” (1966, p. 4) and
that “the aim of a skillful performance is achieved by the observance of a set of
rules which are not known as such to the person following them” (1962, p. 49).
Tacit knowledge is often referred to as “know-how” or “street smarts” and is usu-
ally defined by comparing it to explicit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is knowl-
edge that can be expressed, either verbally or in written form.

Address correspondence to Gary S. Insch, College of Business and Economics,

West Virginia University, P. O. Box 6025, Morgantown WV 26506-6025; gary.insch@
mail.wva.edu (e-mail).

495
 496 The Journal of Psychology

In the management literature, both individual and group tacit knowledge

have been linked to improved performance in organizations (Berman, Down, &
Hill, 2002; Sternberg, Wagner, & Okagaki, 1993; Wagner, 1987; Wagner &
Sternberg, 1986). Although the concept is intriguing and a great deal of literature
now exists on the phenomenon of tacit knowledge, a number of problems persist.
First, there are very few measures of tacit knowledge because, by definition, it is
difficult to communicate and is therefore difficult to measure (Berman et al.).
Indeed, Berman et al. noted that if tacit knowledge could be measured directly, it
could also be codified, and therefore, it would no longer be tacit knowledge; it
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

would be explicit knowledge.

Nevertheless, this does not mean that tacit knowledge cannot be observed. A
master potter may not be able to precisely articulate how to throw an intricate pot,
but by observing the behavior of the master versus a novice it is clear that the mas-
ter potter has a great deal of knowledge that the novice does not have. This knowl-
edge has been developed over years of throwing pots and can be observed by watch-
ing the master in the process of creating the intrinsic pot. This has led many
researchers to explore tacit knowledge as indicated by skills, competencies, and
behaviors (Nonaka, 1994; Sternberg et al., 2000; Wagner & Sternberg, 1986).
Second, although a number of authors have proposed that tacit knowledge is
a multidimensional construct rather than a one-dimensional construct (Nonaka,
1994; Sternberg et al., 2000; Wagner, 1987; Wagner & Sternberg, 1986), very
few empirical researchers have explored this possibility. Finally, because tacit
knowledge is gained through extensive experience and individual actions in var-
ious contexts, its measurement remains largely domain specific.
In this article, we address some of these problems. We first provide a brief
overview of the theoretical basis of tacit knowledge and explain why a multi-
dimensional model is needed. We then propose a domain-general, six-factor
model of tacit knowledge. Second, we present the results from a replication of
a recent study that specifically address academic tacit knowledge. Third, we
discuss the development of a new domain-specific scale, the Academic Tacit
Knowledge Scale (ATKS) and present the results of our exploratory factor
analysis. Finally, we review the confirmatory factor analysis of the model and
conclude with a discussion of the implications of our model and the ATKS on
future research.

Theoretical Basis of Tacit Knowledge

As previously discussed, Polanyi (1962, 1966) viewed tacit knowledge as inar-

ticulable and conceived through one’s actions. According to Polanyi (1969) and
later researchers, tacit knowledge is closely related to the concept of skills (Nelson
& Winter, 1982) and is gained through practical experience in various contexts.
In an extensive body of research done by Robert Sternberg and his col-
leagues, tacit knowledge has been explored within the purview of multiple intel-
 Leonard & Insch 497

ligences (Sternberg et al., 2000; Sternberg & Horvath, 1999; Sternberg, Wagner,
Williams, & Horvath, 1995; Wagner & Sternberg, 1986). These researchers pro-
posed that a hallmark of what they term practical intelligence or practical expe-
rience is the acquisition and use of tacit knowledge. They define tacit knowledge
as “action-oriented knowledge, acquired without direct help from others, which
allows individuals to achieve goals they personally value” (Sternberg et al., 1995,
p. 916). Specifically, they proposed a definition of tacit knowledge with three
characteristics: (a) It is it acquired with little or no environmental support; (b) it
is procedural; and (c) it is practically useful.
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

Sternberg developed domain-specific tests of tacit knowledge that are based

on situations that an individual might face in the real world. Those who answer
like experts and leaders in their fields are judged to have acquired more tacit
knowledge in that domain. He contends that tacit knowledge tests are better pre-
dictors of career success than measures of general intelligence or are at least the
best secondary predictors of career success after taking general intelligence into
account. People who are more skilled at acquiring tacit knowledge, he asserts, do
better in a variety of fields including sales, business management, academic psy-
chology, and military leadership (Sternberg et al., 2000).
In his dissertation work under the supervision of Sternberg, Wagner (1987)
explored the scope and structure of tacit knowledge. He defined tacit knowledge
as practical know-how that usually is not openly expressed or stated and which
must be acquired in the absence of direct instruction. He proposed that tacit
knowledge has various kinds of content and is used in various contexts. The con-
tent includes tacit knowledge about managing oneself, managing tasks, and man-
aging people. Managing oneself includes self-motivation and self-organization
skills. Managing tasks refers to how to do specific tasks well, and managing peo-
ple refers to knowledge about managing one’s subordinates and one’s interac-
tions with one’s peers.
Wagner (1987) also proposed that tacit knowledge may reflect either a
local context or a global context. A local context refers to accomplishing a task
without the consideration of one’s reputation, career goals, or the “big pic-
ture”; a global context refers to a focus on long-range objectives and on how
the present situation fits into the bigger picture. The results of his study indi-
cated support for a multidimensional model of tacit knowledge characterized
by a substantial general factor, which he suggested might be a manifestation
of a general ability to acquire tacit knowledge. He also found that tacit knowl-
edge increased with job experience and was highly correlated with success in
one’s career.
Nonaka and Konno (1998) argued that tacit knowledge has two dimen-
sions: a cognitive dimension and a technical dimension. They acknowledged
that there is a great deal of overlap between these two dimensions. They con-
tend that tacit knowledge has a cognitive dimension in the sense that it is
scripted, and the scripts are composed of beliefs, ideas, and values that are
 498 The Journal of Psychology

often taken for granted; the technical dimension is closely related to the gen-
erally accepted definition of tacit knowledge as “know-how” or informal,
hard-to-pin-down skills. These various definitions and dimensions of tacit
knowledge are shown in Table 1.
The literature makes it clear that tacit knowledge is developed through
action and experiences, and although the majority of authors imply its multidi-
mensionality, very little empirical work has been done to demonstrate this. One
goal of our research was to develop a multidimensional model and then to test
that model. To develop the model, we began with Nonaka’s (1994) claim that
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

tacit knowledge has both a cognitive dimension and a technical-skills dimension,

and we proposed a third dimension that we believe is implicit in Wagner’s (1987)
work, a social dimension. Using these principles as our foundation, we proposed
that tacit knowledge has three main dimensions: cognitive, technical, and social
that contain knowledge of self, knowledge of tasks, and knowledge of other peo-
ple (see Figure 1).
In the following sections, we discuss each of these dimensions. For the sake
of discussion, we refer to these dimensions as “skills.” Before we do so, it is
important to provide a brief overview of cognitive schema.

Cognitive Schema

In information processing theory, cognitive schemas are defined as mental

representations of knowledge or knowledge structures that are created as a
result of prior information processing and interaction with the social environ-
ment (Markus & Zajonc, 1985). Schemas organize knowledge about specific
stimulus domains and guide our behavior in various situations. They are gen-

TABLE 1. Definitions and Dimensions of Tacit Knowledge

Polanyi Nonaka & Sternberg

(1966) Konno (1998) Wagner (1987) et al. (1995)

Acquired via Cognitive Managing self Action-oriented

experience dimension Self-motivation Goal-directed
Self-organization
Technical skills Managing tasks Self-acquired
dimension
Managing others Procedural
Knowledge of others structure
Ability to interact
Local vs. global High practical
usefulness
 Leonard & Insch 499

Cognitive
• Self-Motivation
• Self-Organization

Technical Tacit
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

• Individual Task Knowledge

• Institutional Task

Social
• Task-Related Interaction
• Social Interaction

FIGURE 1. Proposed multidimensional structure of tacit knowledge.

erally enacted subconsciously. They start as a simple network and develop into
more complex knowledge structures. Mature schemas are more extensive,
more organized, and contain more bits of information than do less mature
schemas.
It is generally believed that we have cognitive schema about many aspects
of our daily life. For instance, we have schema about our self and other people,
schema about events and processes and schema about social situations. These
three types of schemas are closely related to the content of tacit knowledge dis-
cussed by Wagner (1987)—knowledge about oneself, tasks, and other people—
and are discussed in more depth in the following sections on cognitive, techni-
cal, and social dimensions of tacit knowledge. Thus, in terms of tacit knowledge,
cognitive schema are the repositories of the tacit knowledge that an individual
develops through experience over time.

Cognitive Skills

Although Nonaka and Konno (1998) did not define the elements of the cog-
nitive dimension they proposed, they did note that tacit knowledge was com-
posed of cognitive schemas or scripts. Person or self-schemas are generalizations
 500 The Journal of Psychology

about oneself or other people’s skills and competencies abstracted from the pre-
sent situation and past experiences. In terms of tacit knowledge about oneself,
self schemas are essentially one’s self-concept, including self-efficacy, which is
a type of self schema that applies to performing a particular task.

Cognitive self-motivation skills. Motivation is goal directed and includes any-

thing that energizes, directs, or sustains human behavior (Steers & Porter,
1987). The self-motivation skills that we believe exist as tacit knowledge
would include an understanding of the behaviors or frame of mind that are nec-
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

essary to accomplish one’s goals. In the organizational setting, for example, if

an employee wants to “get ahead” or get a promotion, he not only needs to
know how to perform the specific tasks involved in his job (this knowledge
would be termed technical or task-related tacit knowledge), but he also needs
to perform those tasks in an exemplary fashion. This may entail coming in
early or staying late, or learning new skills to qualify for a promotion. An
understanding of the fact that this extra-role behavior is necessary, and specif-
ically, what extra-role behaviors are necessary, would indicate a higher level of
cognitive self-motivation tacit knowledge.

Cognitive self-organization skills. Self-organization skills are skills that are nec-
essary to provide the setting or the situation needed to perform one’s job. There
are, as they say, “many ways to skin a cat,” and through experience we develop
processes that work best for us to accomplish our jobs. For instance, many of us
find that we occasionally need to take a break from what we are doing and get a
cup of coffee or play a game of solitaire to refocus on our task. In the long run,
we are better able to perform the task and actually may get more work done if we
take that 10-minute break. Over time, we learn what processes work best for our-
selves. This knowledge would be contained in what we have termed cognitive
self-organization tacit knowledge.

Technical Skills

Technical skills include the technical know-how needed to perform a task.

These skills, although termed technical by Nonaka (1994), have elements that
would also be labeled cognitive. These skills are also described in what are often
termed event schemas or cognitive scripts. These types of schema or scripts are
associated with the processes, practices, or ways in which we typically perform
tasks. They are process oriented and result over time as we perform a task many
times (like driving home from work). The first time we perform a task, we tend
to think about every step and deliberate about the many alternative ways we can
perform each step. Over time, as we learn the best way to perform the task, we
“lock in” the script, or program, and do not think about each step again (unless
we experience a significant problem).
 Leonard & Insch 501

Individual technical skills. Individual technical skills similar to Wagner’s

description of local tacit knowledge include an understanding of the steps that
one needs to go through to complete one’s own task efficiently and capably as
well as knowledge of how to use the technology needed to complete one’s job.
For instance, an administrative assistant may begin his day by checking his voice
mail and answering his e-mail. These tasks require knowledge of the voice mail
system as well as knowledge of computers and computer software.

Institutional technical skills. The second type of technical tacit knowledge that
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

we propose would be what Wagner termed global and would involve an under-
standing of how one’s tasks fit into the bigger picture. The “big picture” knowl-
edge that we have termed institutional technical skill involves a broader under-
standing of organizational processes as well as how one’s own task fits into the
broader organizational context. An example of this type of tacit knowledge
would include an understanding of organizational culture or accepted organiza-
tional processes that apply to all employees rather than skills that are specific to
an individual’s job.

Social Skills

The current literature on tacit knowledge has focused heavily on the charac-
teristics of the individual and the task or job characteristics. Nevertheless, peo-
ple do not perform tasks in a vacuum. They must eventually interact with other
human beings to completely fulfill most tasks. We propose that the social aspects
are critical to success and should receive greater attention in the examination and
discussions of tacit knowledge.
The social dimension of tacit knowledge that we are proposing involves an
understanding of how to interact with others. In his discussion of the content of
tacit knowledge, Wagner (1987) referred to this skill as the ability to manage
other people, but he does not discuss in any depth what this actually means.
Because organizational tasks are accomplished in social settings, it is important
to understand what social knowledge and skills an individual needs to learn to
more effectively perform his job. The appropriate behaviors in social settings are
contained in what are termed role schema or social schema.

Task-related social interaction. In terms of performing one’s job, it is important

to know who to turn to for advice to accomplish necessary tasks as well as who
to get to know to learn new information that is job or task related. The ability to
acquire this type of tacit knowledge we call task-related social interaction.

General social interaction. However, not all information gathered from others is
specifically job related. Indeed, when we interact with others in any social situ-
ation, it is possible that we will learn more about our company, our job, and the
 502 The Journal of Psychology

people we work with. The ability to interact in purely social settings is what we
have labeled the general social interaction dimension of tacit knowledge.
By adding the social dimension, we are proposing a more in-depth discus-
sion of tacit knowledge that we believe better captures the entire process or the
context in which jobs or tasks are performed.

Why Measures of Tacit Knowledge Are Needed

To date, a great deal of literature exists on the phenomenon of tacit knowl-

Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

edge. However, little in the way of methodology is available for the measurement
of such knowledge other than that proposed by Sternberg and his colleagues. In
a series of studies on practical intelligence, these authors attempted to develop
assessments of tacit knowledge in real-world pursuits (Sternberg et al., 2000;
Sternberg et al., 1993; Sternberg et al., 1995; Wagner & Sternberg, 1986). The
basic process they used to develop these measures was complex but involved
interviewing individuals on how they would handle critical situations on their
jobs, extracting the tacit knowledge implicit in those interviews and the con-
struction of scenarios with possible solutions. Individuals were then asked to
rank the possible solutions and were assigned a response profile that could be
compared with the “expert” response profile. The less deviation in the profile
from the profile of an expert, the higher one’s tacit knowledge.
Situational judgment tests such as the one developed by Sternberg and his
colleagues have a long history in the psychological assessment literature. They
are often used to predict job performance, but there is very little research con-
cerning the validity of such tests (McDaniel, Morgeson, Finnegan, Campion, &
Braverman, 2001). In a recent meta-analysis of situational judgment tests done
by McDaniel et al., the authors noted that the constructs measured by these types
of tests are restricted by the content of the questions and that Wagner’s (1987)
Managerial Tacit Knowledge Inventory bears less resemblance to its construct
definition and more to other situational judgment tests.
On the basis of the mixed results found for existing measures of tacit knowl-
edge, it is important to explore other measurement options. The measure that we
developed for this study is based on behavior thought to reflect tacit knowledge.
A behaviorally based measure of tacit knowledge makes sense in light of the fact
that, according to Polanyi (1966), tacit knowledge is primarily seen through an
individual’s actions rather than through specific explanations of what that indi-
vidual knows. We chose academia as the setting for measuring tacit knowledge
because it is a controlled setting in which a clear, consistent, and universally
understood measure of performance exists—one’s grade point average (GPA).
Most students work to achieve good grades, and even those who do not under-
stand that GPA is the standard and accepted measure of academic performance.
In Experiment 1, we attempted to replicate one measure of academic tacit
knowledge proposed by Somech and Bogler (1999). In Experiment 2, we describe
 Leonard & Insch 503

the process we used to develop a new measure of academic tacit knowledge and
report the results of the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the scale.

EXPERIMENT 1—REPLICATION OF ACADEMIC TACIT

KNOWLEDGE STUDY

Method

As previously mentioned, the measurement of tacit knowledge is con-

Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

strained by the domain within which the knowledge is gained and used.
Researchers in this area now focus on exploring tacit knowledge in various con-
texts. Wagner and Sternberg (1986) argued that tacit knowledge is acquired indi-
rectly and informally and that it is essential for one’s survival and success in dif-
ferent settings. For instance, Sternberg and his colleagues (Sternberg et al., 1993)
explored tacit knowledge in academia as practical intelligence, and they argued
that in order to succeed in school you need expert knowledge of the school envi-
ronment. In the formal academic setting, academic knowledge is considered
“knowing what,” whereas daily problems are tackled by using tacit knowledge,
which emphasizes procedures or “knowing how,” that is, knowing how to get an
ID card or knowing how to challenge a grade.
Studying tacit knowledge in an academic setting is not unprecedented. In a
recent study by Somech and Bogler (1999), the relationship between tacit knowl-
edge and academic success was explored for university students in Israel. The
authors hypothesized that success in academic studies was the result of students’
ability to apply tacit knowledge, and that students’ socioeconomic status (SES)
would be related to their use of tacit knowledge. These authors developed a mea-
sure of “academic tacit knowledge” using a 10-item survey based on the defini-
tion by Sternberg and his colleagues (Sternberg et al., 1995) in which tacit
knowledge is viewed as informal and implicit knowledge used to achieve one’s
goals. In their study, Somech and Bogler indicated that students with low SES
made more use of tacit knowledge than students with high SES, and that students
who were high in tacit knowledge achieved higher academic grades than students
who were low in tacit knowledge.
Because the concept of tacit knowledge is relatively new, empirical
research and measures of tacit knowledge are scarce. Therefore, it is important
to replicate significant studies using other populations in other settings. It is
also important to examine the construct validity of measures of tacit knowl-
edge. Although we applaud the development of a measure of academic tacit
knowledge, we believe there were a number of problems in the Somech and
Bogler (1999) study that we have addressed in this study. First, those authors
did not attempt to identify the dimensions of tacit knowledge. They treated
each of the 10 questions as stand-alone measures and did not test for common
themes among them; nor did they look for underlying factors of tacit knowl-
 504 The Journal of Psychology

edge. Second, because they used only a small sample and only one country, the
generalizability of the findings is also diminished.

Sample and Procedures

We collected data from 428 undergraduate students at a large public univer-

sity in the eastern United States. The sample consisted primarily of seniors
(55.6%) and juniors (43.2%) with a mean age of 21.1 years. The students repre-
sented a wide variety of majors, with a majority from the business school (47%)
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

followed by the school of journalism (17.8%) and arts and sciences (16.7%).
(See Table 2 for the demographic statistics.)
We presented the scale items in the same order as did Somech and Bogler,
using a 6-point rating scale ranging from never do it to always do it. The students
were asked to indicate how frequently they performed each of the behaviors.

Measures

Somech and Bogler (1999) used a 10-question survey to determine the stu-
dents’ level of tacit knowledge and measured their SES on the basis of their parents’
educations and salary ranges. We decided to replicate their study to determine if
their scale provided similar results in a larger university in the United States.

Results

The results from our study differed from those in the Somech and Bogler
study (1999). Although we did find differences in SES and tacit knowledge, only
2 of the 10 scale items were significant at the .05 level. Three more were signif-
icant at the .10 level. In the Somech and Bogler study, 9 of the 10 scale items
were significant at the .05 level. Moreover, whereas we found the SES level to
influence tacit knowledge, the correlation was in the opposite direction for
Somech and Bogler. They found students with lower SES to have higher tacit
knowledge; our study showed students with higher SES to have higher tacit
knowledge. (See Table 3).
Clearly, there is a need for further exploration. Several factors could have
affected the outcome, including (a) school size (2,700 students vs. 24,000), (b)
culture (Israel vs. the United States), (c) type of majors (in Israel, mainly liberal
arts vs. in the United States, a broader mix including a large number of business
majors). Moreover, the Somech and Bogler survey (1999) was not predicated on
theory but rather simply from the open-ended question surveys completed by the
Israeli students. Consequently, in an attempt to discover why there were differ-
ences, we returned to the literature on tacit knowledge in an effort to expand the
10-item scale into a multiple-item scale that was more theory driven. By doing
so, it was our goal to better capture the concept of academic tacit knowledge.
 Leonard & Insch 505

TABLE 2. Frequencies of the Background Variables

Frequency
Category n %

Academic discipline (n = 383)

Academic affairs 1 .3
Agriculture, forestry, and consumer sciences 33 8.6
Arts and sciences 64 16.7
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

Business and economics 180 47.0

Creative arts 2 .5
Engineering and mineral resources 6 1.6
Human resources and education 2 .5
Journalism 68 17.8
Pharmacy 3 .8
Physical education 12 3.1
Social sciences 4 1.0
Undecided/other 8 2.1
Age (n = 350) M = 21.1
Sophomore 3 .7
Junior 182 43.2
Senior 234 55.6
5-year senior 2 .5
Gender (n = 428)
Male 227 53.0
Female 201 47.0
Family status (n = 420)
Single 408 97.1
Married 11 2.6
Divorced 1 .3
Race (n = 424)
Asian 9 2.1
Black 16 3.8
Caucasian 386 91.0
Hispanic/Latino 6 1.4
Middle Eastern 1 .2
Native American 1 .2
Other 5 1.2

EXPERIMENT 2—SCALE DEVELOPMENT

Method
Sample and Procedures
To develop the scale, we used the process recently proposed by Ambrosini
and Bowman (2001). These authors, like many others, proposed that tacit knowl-
edge would be better described as “tacit skills” (Badaracco, 1991; Nelson &
Winter, 1982; Nonaka, 1994). Ambrosini and Bowman also suggested that tacit
 506 The Journal of Psychology

TABLE 3. Means, Standard Deviations, and t Tests of the Tacit

Knowledge Scale

Total Low High

Category sample SES SES t

Reviewing my comprehensive class

notes regularly 0.944
M 3.50 3.41 3.53
SD 1.18 1.15 1.23
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

Appealing an unfair grade 0.817

M 3.35 3.26 3.40
SD 1.68 1.63 1.72
Learning how to use library and
computer services 0.125
M 4.18 4.18 4.16
SD 1.34 1.36 1.35
Learning all university and my
department’s administration rules 1.742*
M 3.02 2.83 3.07
SD 1.38 1.27 1.43
Participating actively in different
activities on campus 2.421**
M 3.32 3.11 3.47
SD 1.44 1.41 1.43
Speaking with professor after class 1.834*
M 3.45 3.30 3.55
SD 1.31 1.20 1.34
Tending to consult with senior students 0.580
M 2.96 2.92 3.01
SD 1.53 1.52 1.56
Speaking with teaching assistant or
professor during office hours 0.468
M 3.40 3.34 3.41
SD 1.36 1.21 1.45
Asking the professor questions for
clarification during and at the end of
class 1.871*
M 3.49 3.31 3.58
SD 1.40 1.29 1.42
Choosing subject for my paper that can
contribute to my progressive higher
studies 2.248**
M 3.83 3.63 3.94
SD 1.34 1.37 1.33
Overall scale 2.032**
M 3.46 3.33 3.52
SD 0.87 0.79 0.88

*p < .10. ** p < .05.

 Leonard & Insch 507

skills could be elicited through the use of semi-structured interviews. We first

interviewed 12 graduate students (experts) on what behaviors or knowledge they
felt were important to their success as undergraduate students. These graduate
students were enrolled in either an MBA program or a Master’s of Industrial
Labor Relations program. The students had various undergraduate degrees and
met individually with us to discuss the concept of tacit knowledge. These inter-
views lasted approximately 15 minutes each.
We then asked 240 upper-level undergraduate students from various majors
what they needed to know to succeed in college and what they knew now that they
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

wish they had known when they started college. We compiled a list of 148 items.
We reviewed this list, and items that represented similar themes were grouped
together and reworded to reflect the behavior mentioned by students. For instance,
“take good notes,” “review notes regularly,” and “rewrite notes,” were combined
and the item “review my comprehensive class notes regularly” from Somech and
Bogler’s (1999) original scale was retained to reflect these behaviors. The number
of times each item was mentioned by students was tallied and items that were men-
tioned by at least 5 students were retained. The resulting list of items contained 52
behaviors that seemed to capture the tacit knowledge needed and used in a student’s
everyday life. The items chosen for the pool appeared to have universal or near uni-
versal relevance for students across social roles and life settings.
As previously explained, we used a 6-point rating scale ranging from never
do it to always do it. The students were asked to indicate how frequently they
performed each of the behaviors. We collected data for this study from 428
undergraduate students at a large public university in the eastern United States,
as was previously described (See Table 3).

Exploratory Factor Analysis

To perform exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, we split the survey

data into two samples. The exploratory factor analysis sample consisted of every
third survey in the database (n = 142). An initial principal components factor
analysis with varimax rotation resulted in a 14-factor solution with eigenvalues
over 1.0. However, given that the factors could not be considered orthogonal and
that we were trying to identify the observable behaviors of tacit knowledge rather
than the components that lead to tacit knowledge, we chose the statistically more
appropriate promax rotation with principal axis factoring extraction. An exami-
nation of the scree plot from this analysis indicated the appropriateness of a five-
or six-factor solution.
On the basis of this analysis, we eliminated from the scale all the items that
loaded below a .475 threshold. This level was chosen because two items that are
theoretically consistent with the literature and our proposed model loaded at this
level. At the .475 level there were no cross-loadings of scale items. The remain-
ing 26 scale items were then re-examined for face validity using the literature as
 508 The Journal of Psychology

a guide. The six-factor model and its accompanying scale measures, eigenvalues,
and Cronbach alphas are given in Table 4.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

To test the proposed six-factor model that emerged from our exploratory fac-
tor analysis of the Academic Tacit Knowledge Scale (ATKS), we conducted con-
firmatory factor analysis using structural equation modeling software (EQS;
Bentler, 1998) to compare two models representing plausible alternative factor
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

structures. The comparison was between the suggested six-factor model and a
five-factor model with task-related social skills and general social interaction
skills combined into one factor.
The initial run of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated an improved
model fit with the elimination of four scale items: (a) Act responsibly regarding
school work; (b) participate in student-organized study groups; (c) register for
classes early; and (d) actively participate in class.
The five-factor, 22-item model showed the best fit in absolute terms, χ2(189,
N = 142) = 353.86, p < .05, and exhibited better fit than the proposed six-factor,
22-item model on each of the goodness-of-fit indicators (Comparative Fit Index =
.901, Incremental Fit Index = .904, Goodness-of-Fit Index = .902, Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation = .056). The CFI, IFI, and GFI ranged from 0 to
1, and a value of .90 or larger indicated an acceptable fit to the data (Hu & Bentler,
1995). Browne and Cudeck (1993) suggested that a value of 0.05 indicates a close
fit and that values up to 0.08 represent reasonable errors of approximation in the
population. Overall, the fit indexes in this study indicated that the model provid-
ed a very good fit to the data. The standardized factor structure coefficients and
interfactor correlations of the five-factor 22-item model are shown in Figure 2.

General Discussion

The concept of tacit knowledge has gained acceptance in a number of streams

of research. In the performance literature, tacit knowledge has been linked to
improved job performance, and in the growing and substantial literature on knowl-
edge creation and knowledge management, at the strategic level of analysis tacit
knowledge is an essential component of organizational knowledge creation
processes (Conner & Prahalad, 1996; Kogut & Zander, 1996; Nonaka, 1994; Non-
aka & Takeuchi, 1995; Weick, 1995). If the concept is to remain useful, we need to
explore, in more depth, the underlying dimensions of tacit knowledge.
The results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated that a five-factor model
of tacit knowledge may provide a richer understanding of the illusive concept of
tacit knowledge. The addition of a social dimension is particularly important.
Because jobs are performed in social settings, an understanding of the interactions
that occur in those settings is essential to success in organizations. Unfortunately, we
 Leonard & Insch 509

TABLE 4. Exploratory Factor Analysis 6-Factor Solution’s Measurement

Scales and Reliability Test Results

Factor Factor loading

Cognitive Self-Motivation Skills (8 items) EV = 8.189 α =.8604

Attend class regularly .777
Make time to study .736
Get to class on time .729
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

Act responsibly regarding school work .679

Decide to study before going out for the evening .650
Prioritize my activities .613
Complete homework and assignments on time .579
Possess a willingness to learn .567
Cognitive Self-Organization Skills (4 items) EV = 1.159 α = .8310
Demonstrate self control .890
Stay on task .701
Actively participate in class .587
Participate in assigned group work outside of class .562
Individual Technical Skills (4 items) EV = 3.148 α = .7380
Speak with professors after class .820
Speak with teaching assistants or professors
during office hours .654
Ask the professor questions for clarification during
and at the end of class .620
Tend to consult with senior students .577
Institutional Technical Skills (4 items) EV = 1.521 α = .8059
Overload myself with too many classes .752
Set regular study times .730
Meet regularly with my advisor .566
Register for classes early .479
Task-Related Interaction (4 items) *EV = 1.990 α = .7843
Set up my schedule so I can take classes with friends .881
Participate in student-organized study groups .637
Get to know other students in my classes .603
Get to know lots of different people .479
Social Interaction Skills (2 items) EV = 1.003 α = .6980
Participate actively in different activities on campus .679
Get involved in campus groups or clubs .547

*Six-item Social (combination of Local and Global), α = .8141.

were not able to tease out the differences in tacit knowledge that might result from
task-related social interaction versus general social interaction, but we believe this
is a rich area for further research and refinement of the scale used in this study.
 510 The Journal of Psychology

V1
.89
V2 .97 Cognitive
Self-Motivation
.88
V3 Skills
.99
V5 .63

V6 .74
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

.19
V7

V8
.77
Individual
V9 Technical Tasks
.84

V10 .74

V11 .54

V12

V13
.17
.44
V15
.49 Social Skills
V16
.76
V25 .95

V26
.36 Institutional
V17 Technical Skills
.63

V18 .41

V19

V21 .63
Cognitive
.86 Self-Organizational
V22 Skills
.54

V24

FIGURE 2. The standard factor structure coefficients and interfactor

correlations of the 5-factor, 22-item model.
 Leonard & Insch 511

Results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicate that the Academic Tacit
Knowledge Scale (ATKS) developed in this research seems to capture tacit
knowledge in academic settings and may provide greater insight into success in
academic settings. The next logical steps in our research agenda with regard to
the ATKS are scale refinement and testing with the dependent variable of GPA.
Although this article provides an important initial step in the development of
a multidimensional model of tacit knowledge, the main limitation of the empiri-
cal research is the fact that the ATKS, like all other measures of tacit knowledge,
is domain specific. The model proposed here is considered domain general and
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

we are proposing that tacit knowledge is multidimensional with cognitive, tech-

nical, and social dimensions related to skills and ability in managing both one’s
own and others’ behaviors as well as focusing on both local and global issues. The
balance of skills necessary in one discipline or career may differ from another, but
we hold that the cognitive, technical, and social dimensions would be present in
all careers. For instance, whereas an individual in sales would need to develop
strong social skills and a researcher would need to develop strong technical skills,
both would require some level of skill in all three areas.
Wagner and Sternberg (1986) suggested that tacit knowledge may actual-
ly be a measure of a general level of ability that tends to define the successful
from the less successful (Richards & Busch, 2000). The ability to acquire tacit
knowledge may be a skill that successful people possess. It may be that peo-
ple differ in the extent to which they acquire tacit knowledge and in how fully
they use the tacit knowledge they have acquired. If this were the case, devel-
oping a multidimensional model that includes the underlying dimensions
would be important. The contribution of our research is a preliminary step in
identifying those dimensions and beginning a stream of research to test the
model. The results of this study provide support for the multidimensionality of
tacit knowledge and may encourage others to explore this possibility. It is
important to develop measures of tacit knowledge in other settings and to use
those scales to further test the multidimensionality of tacit knowledge that we
have proposed in our model.

REFERENCES
Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2001). Tacit knowledge: Some suggestions for opera-
tionalization. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 811–829.
Badaracco, J. L. (1991). The knowledge link. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Bentler, P. M. (1998). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bul-
letin, 107, 238–245.
Berman, S. L., Down, J., & Hill, C. W. L. (2002). Tacit knowledge as a source of com-
petitive advantage in the National Basketball Association. Academy of Management
Journal, 45, 13–31.
Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A.
Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). New-
bury Park, CA: Sage.
 512 The Journal of Psychology

Conner, K. R., & Prahalad, C. K. (1996). A resource-based theory of the firm: Knowledge
versus opportunism. Organizational Science, 7, 477–501.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equa-
tion modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996). What do firms do? Coordination, identity and learning.
Organizational Science, 7, 502–518.
Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. (1985). The cognitive perspective in social psychology. In G.
Lindsey & E. Aronson, (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 137–230). New
York: Random House.
McDaniel, M. A., Morgeson, F. P., Finnegan, E. B., Campion, M. A., & Braverman, E. P.
Downloaded by [Quaid-i-azam University] at 01:57 11 October 2017

(2001). Use of situational judgment tests to predict job performance: A clarification of

the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 730–740.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An economic theory of evolutionary change. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organiza-
tional Science, 5, 14–37.
Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: Building a foundation for knowl-
edge creation. California Management Review, 40, 40–54.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal knowledge. London: Harper.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Polanyi, M. (1969). Knowing and being. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Richards, D., & Busch, P. A. (2000, December). Measuring, formatting and modeling
tacit knowledge. Paper presented at International Congress on Intelligent Systems and
Applications, Sydney, Australia.
Somech, A., & Bogler, R. (1999). Tacit knowledge in academia: It’s effect on student
learning and achievement. The Journal of Psychology, 133, 605–616.
Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1987). Motivation and work behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sternberg, R. J., Forsythe, G. B., Hedlund, J., Horvath, J. A., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W.
M., Snook, S., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Horvath, J. A., (1999). Tacit knowledge in professional practice.
Researcher and practitioner perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg, R. J., Wagner, R. K., & Okagaki, L. (1993). Practical intelligence: The nature
and role of tacit knowledge in work and at school. In H. Reese & J. Puckett (Eds.),
Advances in lifespan development (pp. 205–227). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg, R. J., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W. M., & Horvath, J. A. (1995). Testing com-
mon sense. American Psychologist, 50, 912–927.
Wagner, R. K. (1987). Tacit knowledge in everyday intelligence behavior. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 52, 1236–1247.
Wagner, R. K., & Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Tacit knowledge and intelligence in the everyday
world. In R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner (Eds.), Practical intelligence. Nature and origins
of competence in everyday world (pp. 51–83). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.

Original manuscript received July 6, 2004

Final revision accepted January 12, 2005