Technological capabilty and level of training (both formal and informal) are some essential variables for measuring it. Particularly, observation, site visit, hands on programme among others

Thanks, Caleb. I assume that measuring it like this requires different instruments for different organizations, since every organization relies on specific knowledge/ technology/ training. Are you maybe aware of something more general that I could use for a range of organizations?

Hi Susanne, my team and I have been working on a tool over the last 7 years that was built for measuring and stimulating wellbeing and organizational performance. It is possible that Vantagepoint could measure the transfer of tacit knowledge however it has not been tested expressly for that purpose. We are about to release the new version and I am happy to share it with you if you'd like to take a look.

Hi Susanne! In my view there should be no unique instrument. We all are prisoners of the measuring systems from science, where there are LINEAR metrics. Knowledge, especially tacit knowledge is strongly NONLINEAR. Measuring nonlinear entities requests NONLINEAR metrics! So far, these nonlinear metrics are constructs based on indicators. Theoretically there should be an infinity of indicators. Practically, we must choose a limited number. Thus, you may construct yourself a set of indicators able to solve your problem. Constantin Bratianu, Professor of Strategic Management & Knowledge Management, Faculty of Business Administration, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania.

Hi Susanne, I think Professor Constantin Bratianu is true.  It is very difficult to find instruments to measuring transfer of tacit knowledge.  I think you will be find the indicators through observation.  Some of these indicators is the intensity of the discussions held, the contents of the discussion, and the process of learning through apprenticeship.  Most of these transfers occur through an informal process.  Nur Effendi, lecturer of business administration at the university of Lampung-Indonesia

I could imagine a following project. First, you pick-up a measure (test) of a specific domain of tacit knowledge (e.g. TKIM Wagner & Sternberg). Second, you develop a measurement key specifically for a given organization (“local key”). Third, you measure managers in the organization. Fourth, you measure new people who enter the organization and take managerial positions. Fifth, you measure the tacit knowledge after one year, two year and/or three years of people whom you measured at the entry. Sixth, you analyze relationships between managers with whom he/she worked together and the changes in the tacit knowdge. The project would have several risks, but it transfer occurs it should show-up in the test scores. Victor Wekselberg, organizational psychologist

Wow, when did this discussion take off? I had given up already. Thanks for all your suggestions!

Zephyr, I would definitely want to take a look if that is possible!

Constantin, I fully agree: We should not be slaves of our methodology. But I need to compare different organizations, as well as different interventions, so I need something that is quantitatively comparable. I like your comment on measuring it through a set of indicators - as far as I can judge from all I read, this is the common approach used by researchers in that area.

Nur, I agree with your perspective. Qualitative research would be most rewarding. Unfortunately, it is beyond what I can do with this project.

Victor, great reference, I just took a look at the website! And for the design you suggested, it's a nice wrap up of what I had in mind :-)

Thank you all!

Hi Susanne, absolutely. I will be in touch via direct message within the next day or two.

Thanks, Riad, absolutely agree. I took from the above discussion that it definitely is something to be measured indirectly, via facilitating vs. impeding factors to the transfer.

Zephyr, thanks in advance!

Hi Susane! I would continue Riad's suggestions with the importance of evaluating the organizational culture with respect to knowledge sharing. That means to see the degree of decision making transparency, the level of trust, and a rewarding system able to stimulate knowledge sharing and not individual expertise.

Hi Susane, to continue with Bratianu's suggestion I would investigate the organization culture that supports innovation such as presence of opportunities to try out new ideas, degree of accommodation of failure that arise from trying out, provision of resources to try out new ideas, do research and support development of new ideas.

Im looking in my Research for an instrument to measure the results of knowledge transfer. I’m almost tired screening the web for he validated Likert scale based instructUnenthusiastic. Nothing found so far

Dear Grzegorz,

I am working on knowledge transfer (tacit and open) for 25 years. To get some idea how to penetrate into the field enclosed please find a paper based on interviews and a small survey.

Success!

Thanks for the answers given! However, we need to first understand whether the researcher is looking at knowledge transfer as a process or an outcome! The two ojectives may call for different assessment procedure. For instance, if you are looking at knowledge transfer as an outcome, the you have to measure the actual change ithe recipient's knowledge as a result of associating with the knowledge source.

A measure of progress toward measuring the transfer of tacit knowledge within organizations can be accomplished by means of system, output, and outcome measures centered around knowledge management initiatives. Examples of knowledge management initiatives include (a) best practice directories, (b) lessons learned database, (c) communities of practice or special interest groups, (d) expert or expertise directories, (e) portals, (f) lead tracking systems, (g) collaborative systems, (h) yellow pages, and (i) e-learning systems.

For example, system measures for a best practice directory would include (a) number of downloads, (b) dwell time, (c) usability surveys, (d) number of users, (e) total number of contributions, and (f) contribution rate over time; output measures would include (a) usefulness surveys, (b) anecdotes, and (c) user ratings of contribution value; outcome measures would include (a) time, money, or personnel time saved by implementing best practice, (b) number of groups certified in the use of the best practice, and (c) rate of change in operating costs.

I think the unit of analysis is also important? Most of our submission is centred on knowledge transfer between organizations! Can't colleagues engage in knowledge transfer behaviours between themselves? Can't colleagues learn from each other? why does research neglect individual level of analysis in knowledge transfer?

this paper could be helpful:

Insch, G. S., McIntyre, N., & Dawley, D. (2008). Tacit knowledge: A refinement and empirical test of the academic tacit knowledge scale. The journal of psychology, 142(6), 561-580.