ABSTRACT
The research of knowledge is not a new science. It derives from a long philosophical tradition that started millenniums ago. Since then philosophers have tried to find out what knowledge really is and what meaning it has for humankind. In traditional Western philosophy, the quest for the understanding of the nature of knowledge began with Plato and his student Aristotle and suggests that Western thinking is based on the fundamental split between mind and body (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995). Over the centuries two main Western traditions developed, discussing knowledge from a philosophical perspective. The first of these traditions is rationalism, which supports the belief that reason alone, without any reliance on experience, can reveal the nature of reality. The second tradition is empiricism, which refers to the idea that all knowledge is based on experience and that the human mind is not equipped with a set of concepts in advance of experience. In the nineteenth century attempts were made to reconcile these two philosophical streams, the leading protagonists being Immanuel Kant, Georg Hegel and Karl Marx. Their beliefs laid the foundations for philosophical discussion about the relationship between the self and the outside world, which is manifested by society (Holden 2002). These streams form the background of the knowledge management discussion of today. From the notion of knowledge as truth or meaning a change towards notions
of knowledge as practice or action took place. Knowledge became technology, which strongly influenced the process of industrialization. Accordingly, the concept of knowledge and its role in production changed dramatically and traditional knowledge institutions like the church or universities were sidelined by profit-oriented organizations (Maasdorp 2001). Knowledge suddenly was not some exclusive good anymore that entertained and challenged only the intellects of a certain class; knowledge suddenly became societal, a social good and a common good. By becoming available to many more members of society, the nature of knowledge itself therefore changed. It developed because it was being used and applied by different people, not only by the clergy and philosophers, which led to numerous new and alternative ideas and thus to changes in politics and society. As knowledge developed into a public good, it became an object of interest
for organizations too. Corporations started to recognize the value of
more valuable when it is shared. Knowledge is a very complex and subjective concept and the management of knowledge proves to be more difficult than the management of traditional organizational assets such as money, people, land and other assets.
