**3. The valuable immateriality: tacit knowledge**

In search of the background of what today is referred to as (with relative comfort and understanding) "organizational knowledge", this research took into consideration studies done by Penrose [31]1 when she analyzed companies in the 1950s.

Organizational knowledge is knowledge that is registered in the media under the control of organizations and especially the one that lies within the people minds and flows according to social, formal, or informal interactions [76]. This type of knowledge is composed of personal knowledge, translated by their experience, know-how, and practices developed individually or from within an environment provided by the organization [32].

Penrose sought to find out if there was something that could differentiate organizations regarding its growth or setbacks. In her studies, she assessed and questioned the possibility of there being something else in the firm's growth that was beyond the organization's traditional view on handling human resources (labor) and products (supply chain). She found out that the administrators' experiences translated by their knowledge were revealed as the differentiating factor from one organization to the other. This experience had been transformed into tacit knowledge; it was not available in the form of a manual or coded; in other words, it was not explicit, to be physically incorporated by the organization; she pointed out that this knowledge could not be acquired in the market and concluded that those professionals could bolster or hinder the development of the company. Penrose [31], consequently, asserted knowledge held by more experienced professionals as a particular resource that could be associated with the growth in firms, especially one's individual knowledge, subsequently treated as tacit [8, 33] that if accumulated over time, is capable of providing more efficient opportunities for organizational growth [34].

Penrose [31] developed one of the fundamental assumptions of this theory that the growth of an organization "is essentially an evolutionary process and is based on the cumulative increase of the collective knowledge." Something that Inkpen [3] referred to as 'collaborative knowledge,' and Nonaka and Takeuchi [8] would later represent it as the 'spiral' of the epistemological and ontological knowledge.

In the early 1990s, within the field of strategic management and economics, the theory of 'resource-based view (RBV)' is established and the work of Penrose [31] as a notable

use of this knowledge, especially the more effective personal knowledge [24], this tacit knowl-

**Table 1.** Comparative paradigm of principles of a knowledge organization within the context of Small Claims Federal

Studies done in six organizations of the Asian public sector [16] showed concern for a better understanding of the handling of knowledge. Those organizations opted for increasing efficiency according to the knowledge shared by the most experienced to improve the operational and strategic excellence. The new approach adopted by these six organizations required a rediscussing on how individual and organizational knowledge was (or not) being created and shared, since they saw this knowledge as a fundamental stage of any process that aimed at

When analyzing knowledge management carried out at the Department of National Defense in Canada, Girard and McIntyre [26] argued that this process is not characterized as a novelty. However, the significant results highlight what knowledge sharing continues to generate in

edge favors the emergence of new processes and innovation [12, 25].

**Industry paradigm Knowledge paradigm SCFC context** People under supervision People mutually linked as a network Intense TKS

of knowledge

interaction

People process tangible resources

6 Knowledge Management Strategies and Applications

Process bottlenecks arising from lack

Production related to tangible

Unilateral relationship with customers via the market

Source: adapted from Sveiby [68].

Courts (SCFC).

into products

of capital

products

Flow of information via organizational hierarchy

Information control Accessible information Integrated electronic process systems

Process bottlenecks arising from lack

Relationship according to personal

Production recognizes the importance of intangible assets Judges and servants who, at certain stages of the procedural rite, gather knowledge of the parties and of the lawyers as aids to the (mental) decision-making process of the judge

lawyers, experts, doctors, social workers, judicial units, located in the

There are judges who practice and create an atmosphere of TKS

In the SCFC, the relationship of judges with the parties, with lawyers and with the servers is stimulated for

Judges and servants' relationship with the parties and with lawyers takes place face-to-face (during hearings and over-the-counter visits to provide information and resolve doubts). The relationship of the judges with the servers happens daily, in person and, almost always, without "scheduled time"

exchanging knowledge

same city or not

Network flow among co-workers Network flow among servers, judges,

Knowledge workers convert knowledge into intangible structures

dealing with change in mentality and behavior.

<sup>1</sup> The original work dates from 1959.

contribution [35]. For Bierly et al. [36], such theory almost superseded the traditional view related to industrial organizations (I/O approach)<sup>2</sup> dealt by Porter 10 years earlier [38].

This RBV theory associates the performance of the organization to the combination of two elements, Resources and Capabilities (R & C),3 it highlights skills and expertise in dealing with knowledge, already showing an early interest in tacit knowledge. This theory seeks to explain and predict why some organizations are able to sustain a competitive advantage and achieve better financial returns.

Considering knowledge as a usable resource in order to improve efficiency and organizational effectiveness [39], RBV appears as a precursor to a new theory, the 'knowledge-based view (KBV)' where this asset, knowledge, is regarded as the most strategically important of the resources in a company [40] and the organization as a vehicle, for creation, sharing, storage, and implementation of this source [41].

Kogut and Zander [42], oriented by the KBV, associate organizational growth with knowledge sharing, defining firms as social communities specialized in the fast and efficient transfer of knowledge, especially knowledge that represent know-how, i.e., tacit knowledge [43].

If we live in a society or knowledge era, where tacit knowledge is seen as strategic in the business field and public organizations, what has the literature offered to conceptualize it?
