Do we really know the meaning of knowledge?

Knowledge is the perception of the agreement or disagreement of two ideas - John Locke (1689)

---

Origins: The study of knowledge has been a vital subject matter of philosophy and epistemology since the Babylonians and Egyptians who were able to perform calculations and make calendars as a form of knowledge. During the Ancient Greece era were developed numerous ways of knowledge related partially with the actual concept of knowledge. In the middle Ages, new institutions were also created in terms of knowledge, mainly based in a system of legal rules. This concept changed considerably during the XV century, when knowledge is connected to the empirical, observation and experimentation. Through this knowledge evolution were involved research institutions, state institutions and business communities.

Nowadays, Knowledge is probably the most complicated element to define inside the firm’s resources, but we will try to provide a clear definition, to do that we need to mention the 2 main types of knowledge: as explicit (which can be stored and easily transmitted: books or manuals) and tacit (difficult to transmit, stored in the individual brain).

The concept of knowledge is related with terms as data or information which have similar meanings but they are different. Data refers to raw facts without any processing, it has little meaning and not too benefits to managers and decision-makers. Information would be data that has been processed and shaped to be more useful. Knowledge is the most helpful form in order to make decisions; it has more value than data and information.

How do other researchers define knowledge? Akram et al. (2011) defines knowledge as the primary factor economic development and conventional factors of production, based on Drucker (1994). Blackler and Grant (1996), Spender (1996) and Tsoukas (1996) are authors who try to overcome the mind-mind dualism arguing that knowledge cannot be conceived independently from action and that humans might be able to know in two ways, one based on the exercise of reason (mind) and the other based on experience (body). For positivist, knowledge is universal and the result of systematic analysis of experience in a knowable reality (Spender, 1996). This view is the predominant view in the OECD countries and in the western culture, being also a generally accepted assumption in organizational theory (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995).

A growing number of executives, consultants and management theorists have proclaimed during the 1990s that knowledge constitutes the major source of competitive advantage for organizations (Long and Fahey 2000) becoming a strategic resource for any economic activity.

From my point of view, Davenport (1997) defined it perfectly: “Knowledge is information combined with experience, context, interpretation, and reflection. It is a high-value form of information that is ready to apply to decisions and actions” (Davenport et al. 1997, p. 1). knowledge is considered the key resource that an organization can use in production of physical capital or human capital to obtain organizational improvement.

As pointed out by Nonaka and Teece, competitive advantages of firms depend on their ability to build, utilize and protect knowledge assets.

In further articles, we will link knowledge, knowledge management and its impact on innovation performance.