Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative analysis of machine learning techniques and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to determine the tacit knowledge criteria

  • S.I. : Artificial Intelligence in Operations Management
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Knowledge management is widely considered as a strategic tool to increase firm performance by enabling the reuse of organizational knowledge. Although many have studied knowledge management in a variety of business settings, the concept of tacit knowledge, especially the individual one, has not been explored in due detail. The objective of this study is to identify and prioritize individual tacit knowledge criteria and to explain their effects on firm performance. In the proposed methodology, first, the most prevalent individual tacit knowledge variables are identified by means of knowledge elicitation and feature selection methods. Then, the extracted variables were prioritized using machine learning methods and fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression, and artificial neural networks are used as the first approach, followed by fuzzy AHP as the second approach. Based on the comparative analysis results, SVM (as the best-performed machine-learning technique) and fuzzy AHP methods were identified for the subsequent analysis. The results showed that both SVM and fuzzy AHP determined time efficiency of employees, communication between employees and supervisors, and innovative capability of employees as the most important tacit knowledge criteria. These findings are mostly supported by the extant literature, and collectively shows the synergistic nature of the utilized analytics approaches in determining individual tacit knowledge criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2008). Surfacing tacit sources of success. International Small Business Journal, 26(4), 403–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, G., Ward, P. T., & Tatikonda, M. V. (2010). Role of explicit and tacit knowledge in Six Sigma projects: An empirical examination of differential project success. Journal of Operations Management, 28(4), 303–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anh, P. T. T., Baughn, C. C., Hang, N. T. M., & Neupert, K. E. (2006). Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures: An empirical study in Vietnam. International Business Review, 15(5), 463–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123–1137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnett, D. B., & Wittmann, C. M. (2014). Improving marketing success: The role of tacit knowledge exchange between sales and marketing. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 324–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20(1), 87–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atanassov, K. T., & Gargov, G. (1989). Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 31(3), 343–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beşikçi, E. B., Kececi, T., Arslan, O., & Turan, O. (2016). An application of fuzzy-AHP to ship operational energy efficiency measures. Ocean Engineering, 121, 392–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulut, E., Duru, O., Keçeci, T., & Yoshida, S. (2012). Use of consistency index, expert prioritization and direct numerical inputs for generic fuzzy-AHP modeling: A process model for shipping asset management. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(2), 1911–1923.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büyüközkan, G., & Çifçi, G. (2012). A combined fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS based strategic analysis of electronic service quality in healthcare industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(3), 2341–2354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cakir, O., & Canbolat, M. S. (2008). A web-based decision support system for multi-criteria inventory classification using fuzzy AHP methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 35(3), 1367–1378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese, A., Costa, R., & Menichini, T. (2013). Using Fuzzy AHP to manage Intellectual Capital assets: An application to the ICT service industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(9), 3747–3755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavusgil, S. T., Calantone, R. J., & Zhao, Y. (2003). Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 18(1), 6–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamodrakas, I., Batis, D., & Martakos, D. (2010). Supplier selection in electronic marketplaces using satisficing and fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 490–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandrashekar, G., & Sahin, F. (2014). A survey on feature selection methods. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 40(1), 16–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, C.-M., Hsu, M.-H., & Wang, E. T. G. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872–1888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choudhary, D., & Shankar, R. (2012). An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India. Energy, 42(1), 510–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cianciolo, A. T., Grigorenko, E. L., Jarvin, L., Gil, G., Drebot, M. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Practical intelligence and tacit knowledge: Advancements in the measurement of developing expertise. Learning and Individual Differences, 16(3), 235–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. F., & Olsen, K. (2015). Knowledge management capabilities and firm performance: A test of universalistic, contingency and complementarity perspectives. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(3), 1178–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristianini, N., & Shawe-Taylor, J. (2000). An introduction to support vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L. (2009). Management (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.

  • De Vries, R. E., Van den Hooff, B., & de Ridder, J. A. (2006). Explaining knowledge sharing: The role of team communication styles, job satisfaction, and performance beliefs. Communication Research, 33(2), 115–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delen, D., Zaim, H., Kuzey, C., & Zaim, S. (2013). A comparative analysis of machine learning systems for measuring the impact of knowledge management practices. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 1150–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durán, O., & Aguilo, J. (2008). Computer-aided machine-tool selection based on a Fuzzy-AHP approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 1787–1794.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (learning in doing: Social, cognitive and computational perspectives (pp. 377–404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.025.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Erden, Z., Von Krogh, G., & Nonaka, I. (2008). The quality of group tacit knowledge. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(1), 4–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (2002). The knowledge-based view of the firm. The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, 17(2), 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, L. W., Ottoson, J. M., Garcia, C., & Hiatt, R. A. (2009). Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 151–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumus, A. T. (2009). Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 4067–4074.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, M. T., & Menhaj, M. B. (1994). Training feedforward networks with the Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 5(6), 989–993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldin-Herrgard, T. (2000). Difficulties in diffusion of tacit knowledge in organizations. Journal of Intellectual capital, 1(4), 357–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlow, H. (2008). The effect of tacit knowledge on firm performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 148–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, N. W., & Dyer, J. H. (2004). Human capital and learning as a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 25(12), 1155–1178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haykin, S. (1994). Neural networks: A comprehensive foundation. Prentice Hall PTR.

  • Hedlund, J., Forsythe, G. B., Horvath, J. A., Williams, W. M., Snook, S., & Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Identifying and assessing tacit knowledge: Understanding the practical intelligence of military leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(2), 117–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heo, E., Kim, J., & Boo, K.-J. (2010). Analysis of the assessment factors for renewable energy dissemination program evaluation using fuzzy AHP. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(8), 2214–2220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holste, J. S., & Fields, D. (2010). Trust and tacit knowledge sharing and use. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 128–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornik, K. (1993). Some new results on neural network approximation. Neural networks, 6(8), 1069–1072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikujiro Nonaka. (1998). The Knowledge-Creating Company. In Harvard business review on knowledge management (6th ed.). Boston: Harvard Business Press.

  • Ishizaka, A., & Nguyen, N. H. (2013). Calibrated fuzzy AHP for current bank account selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(9), 3775–3783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jafari, M., Akhavan, P., & Nourizadeh, M. (2013). Classification of human resources based on measurement of tacit knowledge. Journal of Management Development, 32(4), 376–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, A. K., & Moreno, A. (2015). Organizational learning, knowledge management practices and firm’s performance: An empirical study of a heavy engineering firm in India. The Learning Organization, 22(1), 14–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin-Feng, W., Ming-Yan, C., Li-Jie, F., & Jun-Ju, Y. (2017). The construction of enterprise tacit knowledge sharing stimulation system oriented to employee individual. Procedia Engineering, 174, 289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joia, L. A., & Lemos, B. (2010). Relevant factors for tacit knowledge transfer within organisations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(3), 410–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman, C., Öztayşi, B., Sarı, İ. U., & Turanoğlu, E. (2014). Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Knowledge-Based Systems, 59, 48–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keskin, H. (2005). The relationships between explicit and tacit oriented KM strategy, and firm performance. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(1), 169–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khuzaimah, K. H. M., & Hassan, F. (2012). Uncovering tacit knowledge in construction industry: Communities of practice approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 343–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskinen, K. U. (2000). Tacit knowledge as a promoter of project success. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 6(1), 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskinen, K. U., Pihlanto, P., & Vanharanta, H. (2003). Tacit knowledge acquisition and sharing in a project work context. International Journal of Project Management, 21(4), 281–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskinen, K. U., & Vanharanta, H. (2002). The role of tacit knowledge in innovation processes of small technology companies. International Journal of Production Economics, 80(1), 57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotu, V., & Deshpande, B. (2014). Predictive analytics and data mining: concepts and practice with rapidminer. Morgan Kaufmann.

  • Leonard, D., & Sensiper, S. (1998). The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 112–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, Q., & Mendel, J. M. (2000). Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems: theory and design. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(5), 535–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey, K. L. (2011). Barriers to knowledge sharing. In D. Schwartz & D. Te’eni (Eds.), Encyclopedia of knowledge management (2nd ed., pp. 49–61). Hershey: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-931-1.ch006.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • López-Cabarcos, M. Á., Srinivasan, S., Göttling-Oliveira-Monteiro, S., & Vázquez-Rodríguez, P. (2019). Tacit knowledge and firm performance relationship. The role of product innovation and the firm level capabilities. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(2), 330–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Nicolás, C., & Meroño-Cerdán, Á. L. (2011). Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance. International Journal of Information Management, 31(6), 502–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. T., & Pandian, J. R. (1992). The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), 363–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mascitelli, R. (2000). From experience: harnessing tacit knowledge to achieve breakthrough innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management: an International Publication of the Product Development & Management Association, 17(3), 179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, R., Mason, B., & McCrory, J. (2007). Exploring the dichotomies within the tacit knowledge literature: towards a process of tacit knowing in organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 43–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, R., & O’dell, C. (2001). Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 76–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Tacit knowledge for the Development of Organizations. ABC Journal of Advanced Research, 6(1), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mostafa, R., & Klepper, S. (2018). Industrial development through tacit knowledge seeding: Evidence from the Bangladesh garment industry. Management Science, 64(2), 613–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthuveloo, R., Shanmugam, N., & Teoh, A. P. (2017). The impact of tacit knowledge management on organizational performance: Evidence from Malaysia. Asia Pacific Management Review, 22(4), 192–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagati, H., & Rebolledo, C. (2013). Improving operational performance through knowledge exchange with customers. Production Planning & Control, 24(8–9), 658–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nold, H. A. (2012). Linking knowledge processes with firm performance: Organizational culture. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 13(1), 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okuyama, R. (2017). Importance of tacit knowledge in incremental innovation. Journal of Strategy and Management, 10(1), 118–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, C., Vertinsky, I., & Becerra, M. (2015). Transfers of tacit vs. explicit knowledge and performance in international joint ventures: The role of age. International Business Review, 24(1), 89–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathirage, C. P., Amaratunga, D. G., & Haigh, R. P. (2007). Tacit knowledge and organisational performance: Construction industry perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(1), 115–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy (pp. 266–267). NY: Harper Torchbooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pozzali, A., & Viale, R. (2006). Cognition, types of “tacit knowledge” and technology transfer. Contributions to Economic Analysis, 280, 205–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranucci, R. A., & Souder, D. (2015). Facilitating tacit knowledge transfer: routine compatibility, trustworthiness, and integration in M & As. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 257–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(3), 219–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosman, A. J., Biggs, S. F., & Hoskin, R. E. (2012). The effects of tacit knowledge on earnings management behavior in the presence and absence of monitoring at different levels of firm performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 24(1), 109–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S., & O’connor, R. V. (2009). Development of a team measure for tacit knowledge in software development teams. Journal of Systems and Software, 82(2), 229–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S., & O’Connor, R. V. (2013). Acquiring and sharing tacit knowledge in software development teams: An empirical study. Information and Software Technology, 55(9), 1614–1624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3–5), 161–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidler-de Alwis, R., & Hartmann, E. (2008). The use of tacit knowledge within innovative companies: Knowledge management in innovative enterprises. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 133–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senker, J. (1993). The contribution of tacit knowledge to innovation. AI & SOCIETY, 7(3), 208–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01901817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigala, M., & Chalkiti, K. (2007). Improving performance through tacit knowledge externalisation and utilisation: Preliminary findings from Greek hotels. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 56(5–6), 456–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Somsuk, N., & Laosirihongthong, T. (2014). A fuzzy AHP to prioritize enabling factors for strategic management of university business incubators: Resource-based view. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 85, 198–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, M., Berends, H., Van der Bij, H., & Weggeman, M. (2007). The effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(1), 52–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torra, V. (2010). Hesitant fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 25(6), 529–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Hooff, B., & De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vapnik, V. (1998). Statistical learning theory (1st ed.). Wiley-Interscience.

  • Venkitachalam, K., & Busch, P. (2012). Tacit knowledge: Review and possible research directions. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(2), 357–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. J., & Ramsay, B. (1998). A neural network based estimator for electricity spot-pricing with particular reference to weekend and public holidays. Neurocomputing, 23(1–3), 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., & Wang, N. (2012). Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(10), 8899–8908.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., Wang, N., Cao, J., & Ye, X. (2016). The impact of intellectual capital–knowledge management strategy fit on firm performance. Management Decision, 54(8), 1861–1885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whelan, E., & Carcary, M. (2011). Integrating talent and knowledge management: Where are the benefits? Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(4), 675–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L., & Chen, J.-L. (2014). Knowledge management driven firm performance: The roles of business process capabilities and organizational learning. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(6), 1141–1164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J. (2012). A structural model of supply chain performance in an emerging economy. International Journal of Production Research, 50(14), 3895–3903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and control, 8(3), 338–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (2008). Is there a need for fuzzy logic? Information Sciences, 178(13), 2751–2779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaim, H., Gürcan, Ö. F., Tarım, M., Zaim, S., & Alpkan, L. (2015). Determining the critical factors of tacit knowledge in service industry in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207, 759–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaim, H., Muhammed, S., & Tarim, M. (2019). Relationship between knowledge management processes and performance: Critical role of knowledge utilization in organizations. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 17(1), 24–38.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Engineering Department, Istanbul Technical University, Macka, Istanbul, 34367, Turkey

    Ibrahim Yazici, Omer Faruk Beyca & Omer Faruk Gurcan

  2. Business Administration, American University of the Middle East, Egaila, Kuwait

    Halil Zaim

  3. Department of Management Science and Information Systems, Spears School of Business, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA

    Dursun Delen

  4. Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University, Halkali Istanbul, 34303, Turkey

    Selim Zaim

Authors
  1. Ibrahim Yazici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Omer Faruk Beyca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Omer Faruk Gurcan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Halil Zaim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dursun Delen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Selim Zaim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dursun Delen.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yazici, I., Beyca, O.F., Gurcan, O.F. et al. A comparative analysis of machine learning techniques and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to determine the tacit knowledge criteria. Ann Oper Res 308, 753–776 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03697-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03697-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation