The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality is in the Gauteng province of South Africa, which has a population of 4.9 million, and offers a variety of services, including the library and information services (LIS).

This study focused on COJLIS professional staff members who have more than 10 years of experience. The COJLIS has a variety of subsections, and regardless of all being one, employees do not seem to share their acquired knowledge.

This is based on the observation by the first author in the 12 years spent in COJLIS. The subsections include bibliographic and distribution services (BIDS), service extension and resource development (SERD), e-learning and library applications (ELA) and regional libraries. The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality has a knowledge management department, known as Innovation and Knowledge Management (IKM), as a separate entity, but it deals with the ‘City’ at large, rarely coordinating with the Information Services Department and therefore underutilising the department’s expertise. The bibliographic, ELA and SERD are situated in the same vicinity, whilst libraries are scattered throughout the city and are divided into regions – from Region A to Region G. Although history of COJLIS is vivid, there is no strategy in place for knowledge sharing.

The sharing of tacit knowledge in an organisation is important as it supports the organisation’s competitive advantage in the knowledge economy. In the public sector, service delivery is of significant importance. The loss of tacit knowledge, therefore, presents organisations with significant challenges and affects their competitiveness.

Tacit knowledge is deeply engrained and connected to the day-to-day activities of organisations. This makes tacit knowledge a valuable resource if shared and channelled properly. This study, therefore, aims to examine how tacit knowledge is shared in the COJLIS.

This study was guided by the knowledge conversion theory, originally proposed by Nonaka (1991) and further developed by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). The knowledge conversion theory consists of four modes of knowledge conversion, that is, socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation (SECI). The modes of knowledge are famously known as the SECI model as introduced by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and have become the cornerstone of knowledge creation and transfer research. The SECI model highlights that knowledge creation begins when socialisation continues to be externalised, and is then combined with old knowledge before it can be internalised (see Figure 1). This model was adopted for this study because it rests on the assumption that knowledge is created through social interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge, which is central to this study. Moreover, the framework describes how explicit and tacit knowledge is generated, transferred and recreated in organisations. Most importantly, the framework was adopted by a number of studies dealing with the management of both explicit and tacit knowledge, including the studies by Chigada and Ngulube (2015), Zhou, Yan and Zhang (2017) and Maluleka and Ngoepe (2018).

Employees often possess valuable organisational information. The growth of knowledge requires sharing within the organisation between management and staff (IT Knowledge Portal n.d.). Knowledge sharing is thus a very important knowledge management process within organisations. It is a process of interchanging knowledge, skills, information, expertise, experience, intelligence and understanding (Janus 2016; Wang & Noe 2010).

Knowledge sharing in an organisation is essential, as it creates awareness and acceptance of new ideas, increases coordination and improves response times (Amayah 2013; Bulchandani 2015; Sandhu & Goh 2015). The growth of knowledge, therefore, requires sharing within the organisation between management and staff (IT Knowledge Portal n.d.). The creation of this awareness requires socialisation (tacit-tacit) as put across by Davenport and Prusak (2000). According to these authors, it is important to consider informal networks as they involve the day to day interactions between people within work environments. Management should be in support of these networks by providing means of communication.

Bulchandani (2015) further states that no one enjoys being outdated, and without access to the latest information; therefore, employees should often find means to share related views and obtain proper guidance, new ideas and information. Knowledge sharing at the organisational level entails capturing, organising, reusing and transferring the experience-based knowledge, which resides within the organisation and making that knowledge available to all employees (Lin 2007). Thus, at the organisational level, knowledge sharing is designed to transform individual knowledge into organisational knowledge (Foss, Husted & Michailova 2010) and involves leveraging both personal and collective knowledge for the benefit of the organisation. Without knowledge sharing, employees tend to operate within rigid silo-like structures, with duplication of work, resource leaks and wastages and repetition of mistakes (Gaffoor & Cloete 2010). Consequently, in another study, Wang and Wang (2012) posited that tacit knowledge sharing has an impact on innovation quality and operational performance. Therefore, tacit knowledge sharing depends much on socialisation, externalisation, combination, internalisation and practice to support the transfer of tacit knowledge.

Technology can support interaction between people that are not in the same location, whilst some tools are designed to capture unstructured thoughts and ideas. The focus for the successful sharing of tacit knowledge must be on social interaction, problem-solving, mentoring and teaching, and these processes must be supported by information technology (IT) intelligently by means of Knowledge Management Tools (KMTs 2019). Knowledge mechanisms should be built following the employees’ needs and organisational processes to make them effective (Cong & Pandya 2003; Haruyama 2009). Technology also provides a harbour for sharing tacit knowledge where individuals can anonymously share their thoughts, ideas and perspectives about work-related issues and in effect enable people to arrive at new interpretations and ideas that are used for innovation (Panahi, Watson & Partridge 2012). We can, thus, say that IT can be useful as a forum for externalisation of tacit knowledge. The role of IT for tacit knowledge sharing was summarised by KMTs (2019), as an expert finder, as a provision of support in the socialisation and externalisation of tacit knowledge.

According to Nonaka and Konno (1998), top management should come to the realisation that knowledge needs to be nurtured, supported, enhanced and cared for. Managers should act as knowledge brokers (advisors), contributing to the diffusion of knowledge across and between different groups or teams of employees of Community of practice (CoPs) (Irick 2007). This highlights that managers can facilitate the management of tacit knowledge by offering personnel training and exercises to allow individuals access to the knowledge realm of the entire organisation.

Managers should encourage referrals and internal recruitment within the organisation. One of the most effective ways of cushioning against the impacts of high staff turnover is recruiting replacements of those who would have left, from within the organisation (internal recruitment). In most cases, current employees would already be proven good fits for the organisation (Branham 2005). In addition, having current employees who offer referrals to potential employees they know outside the organisation can help minimise confusion of job expectations. Current employees can realistically describe a position and the working environment to an individual outside the organisation.

Coaching and feedback are important aspects in an organisation as such, and it is important for companies to develop and avail feedback mechanisms for employees in which both the organisation and the employee may provide each other with feedback and report-backs on activities carried out during the organisation’s activities. This enables employees’ effort to remain aligned with the organisation’s goals, whilst the organisation is also able to respond to any concerns and issues raised by employees. According to Branham (2005), feedback mechanisms may be either formal or informal, or even a combination of both.

Knowledge sharing in any organisation will always face hindrances. Seba, Rowely and Delbridge (2012:134) reveal that the main barriers to knowledge sharing were the organisational culture, lack of knowledge sharing-conscious leadership as well as the absence of specific time and other resource allocation to knowledge sharing. It is thus clear that a knowledge sharing culture is of vital importance within any organisation, and its absence could lead to employees not taking any real interest in management’s objectives. It is imperative that organisational employees share problems, experiences, insights, templates, tools and best practices with the management. Riege (2005) has summarised the barriers to tacit knowledge sharing (see Table 1).

A number of studies have investigated the management of tacit knowledge in different environments. Rahman et al. (2018) investigated tacit knowledge-sharing behaviour amongst the academic staff of higher learning institutions and found that personality traits affect tacit knowledge-sharing behaviour amongst the academic staff of higher learning institutions, except for conscientiousness personality trait. Their study is almost similar to the current study, the difference being the context in which the two studies were conducted. The current study focuses more on public library setting and the users are the general public as compared to the higher learning institution where the main users are academic staff and students.

Castellani et al. (2019) also looked at tacit knowledge sharing in knowledge-intensive firms. Their study looked at tacit knowledge sharing problems with particular reference to knowledge-intensive firms. The study findings suggest that there are efforts made for knowledge sharing by the employees despite low organisational investment in knowledge sharing tools, lack of time to devote to training and low involvement in strategic objectives by staff members.

Wright (2008) conducted a study named ‘Tacit Knowledge and Pedagogy at UK Universities: Challenges for Effective Management’. In his study, he posits that more emphasis should be placed on tacit knowledge in management, which forms part of the core of the current research. Although he had the same emphasis, he did not incorporate the SECI model. The current research concurs with their idea that tacit knowledge should be the central activity in an organisation and every organisation should prioritise having a Ba (shared space for emerging relations). Whyte and Classen (2012) conducted a study on the use of storytelling as a technique for eliciting tacit knowledge from subject matter experts (SMEs). Their study indicated that even though it is difficult to extract tacit knowledge from these SMEs, the use of storytelling presents possible opportunities. This is plausible given the idea that the human brain is wired to organise information into stories easily.

In Africa, with its rich oral history tradition, storytelling comes naturally to people and is already a means of conveying indigenous knowledge. Therefore, this supports the idea of Whyte and Classen (2012) to use storytelling in the sharing of tacit knowledge. Holgersson (2013) conducted a study on tacit knowledge in which he mentioned the tools for knowledge sharing as mentoring, storytelling, communities of practice and web 2.0. Holgersson (2013) incorporated the use of the SECI model and Ba into his theoretical framework as in the current study. Mungai (2014) suggested the use of training programmes for employees to support tacit knowledge sharing and discourage individualism. The study adopted a qualitative research method. Interviews and observation were used as primary data collection methods. Makhubela (2017) conducted a study in which he examined knowledge retention at platinum mines of the North West province of South Africa. Research suggests that knowledge retention is key in combating institutional knowledge loss. The study highlights that many organisations are yet to find effective means to plug the losses occasioned by the retirement of employees, resigning, downsizing and attrition and so on. Still in South Africa, Dikotla (2019) conducted a study on knowledge sharing in selected municipalities of Limpopo province and reiterated that knowledge is regarded as an important resource for any organisation. Sharing of knowledge is crucial to the survival of an organisation, especially in municipalities which are required to deliver basic services to citizens.

Inter-organisational and intra-organisational knowledge sharing systems are crucial for scientific, social and economic development, especially in knowledge-intensive sectors (Al-Busaidi & Olfman 2017). Tacit knowledge sharing can be achieved using the management practices such as mentoring, training, storytelling, after-action reviews, SMEs and community of practice. Sharing tacit knowledge in the SECI model happens during socialisation (tacit-tacit) as put across by Davenport and Prusak (2000). Socialisation involves the progression of sharing experiences, where employees learn from each other and knowledge is obtained directly from others through observation, imitation and practice.

The researchers asked about the management practices that the COJLIS was aware of. The participants were asked to select which practices are often practised at the COJLIS (see Figure 2).

Knowledge sharing is important in organisations. An assertion from Ngulube (2012) suggests that the true value of knowledge is often realised when it is shared with those who can potentially make use of it. Ngulube (2012:69) further emphasises the two-way process for knowledge sharing, which provides direction, information, ideas and advice to another who in turn learns from the former by observing, listening as well as asking. Having noted the above, the participants were asked to indicate how they shared knowledge in their organisation. This was aimed at finding ways in which tacit knowledge was shared at the COJLIS (see Table 2).

The review of the literature suggests that IT is a critical enabler and foundational element of a knowledge management plan, and with the advances in information and communication technologies, knowledge management can be attained through technological solutions. Chennamaneni and Teng (2011) conceded that IT can contribute to tacit knowledge sharing, although this may not be as rich as face-to-face tacit knowledge sharing. Ehijiagbone, Olatokun and Michael (2020) revealed that tacit knowledge has a high degree of complexity and requires sophisticated channel features for its transfer. Ehijiagbone et al. (2020) further indicated that the use of ICT gadgets in the presentation of seminars is an indirect method of sharing tacit knowledge. Lopez-Nicolas and Soto-Acosta (2010) also found that ICT can influence all knowledge-creation processes identified in the SECI model. Their study shows that ICTs can affect the socialisation of knowledge by facilitating interactions amongst individuals. Therefore, it is imperative to understand that technology plays a major role in knowledge sharing. In this light, the study sought to understand the role of technology in tacit knowledge sharing. Table 3 shows the responses regarding the role of technology in enabling tacit knowledge sharing.

Effective knowledge sharing has many dependents with the involvement of management. Smith and Schurink (2005) highlighted that successful knowledge management (KM) is reliant on senior management’s understanding of the benefits of internal knowledge and how they see it unfold in the organisation. Management is required to promote a knowledge-sharing culture, manage infrastructure and more. It is the role of management to ensure that the organisation stays ahead of a changing world, otherwise as speculated by Peterson (2016), an organisation can become extinct as in the case of dinosaurs, which failed to adapt quickly enough to change. The principal researcher wanted to know the role of management in tacit knowledge sharing (see Table 4).

A review of the literature showed that there are barriers to knowledge sharing. Barriers are factors that obstruct the sharing of tacit knowledge. These can be IT-related (technology), organisational and/or individual. Knowledge sharing is hindered by many attributes when it comes to its sharing. Table 5 presents barriers to tacit knowledge sharing from the respondents.