Chapter 3

Applying SECI Model for Creating

Pedagogical Knowledge

Abstract Ikujiro Nonaka devised the SECI (Socialization, Externalization,

Combination and Internalization) model to describe how explicit and tacit knowl-
edge is generated, transferred and recreated in organizations. This chapter describes
how this model can be used as an analytical lens in education to examine Lesson
Study in individual, group and school contexts. The chapter also explores the effects
of knowledge leadership, organization culture and the four Ba (shared spaces/
contexts for emerging relationships) on institutionalizing the SECI model to man-
age pedagogical content knowledge. It also examines how the model may
streamline the knowledge creation process of Lesson Study.

3.1 Nonaka Knowledge Creation Theory

Currently, the most influential and widely referenced theory to represent the study
of knowledge management (Hislop 2013) is Nonaka’s knowledge creation theory
(1995) which postulates a SECI knowledge creation model (see Fig. 3.1) to explain
how tacit knowledge can be transformed into explicit knowledge and back again as
the basis for individual, group and organizational innovation and learning.
The SECI model involves four knowledge conversion processes: socialization,
externalization, combination and internalization. It sees knowledge creation as a
dynamic process in which an organization operates as an entity that continuously
creates, maintains and exploits knowledge.
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) suggest that many Japanese companies have
succeeded because they use their skills and expertise to create knowledge for
innovation, adapting to a turbulent external environment by constructing a
knowledge management system that creates knowledge for renewal. Knowledge
management in this sense is the means to innovate practices within the organization
for managing rapid change. The fundamental question underpinning the theory is
how to build a knowledge management system to convert tacit knowledge, in the
market or organization, into explicit knowledge, and then how to crystallize it into

© The Author(s) 2019 29

E. C. K. Cheng, Successful Transposition of Lesson Study,
SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2472-7_3
30 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

Fig. 3.1 SECI knowledge conversion model

an innovative product. The theory also includes ideas of reconceptualization of

organizational design and strategy from the perspective of knowledge creation.
Knowledge conversion and creation can be explained by examining the onto-
logical dimension as it relates to epistemological dimensions. Individual knowledge
can be magnified, developed and transmitted to others following the model of a
spiral swinging between two epistemological states (explicit knowledge and tacit
knowledge) and progressing from the individual ontological level to higher onto-
logical levels (group, organization, inter-organization and beyond).
According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), ‘The spiral arises when the inter-
action between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge dynamically rises from a
lower ontological level up to higher levels’ (p. 62). Tacit knowledge and explicit
knowledge are not entirely separate entities, but complementary. They interact with
each other and lead to changes in the creative activities of human beings. This
dynamic model of knowledge creation is anchored in the critical assumption that
human knowledge is created and expanded by the social interaction between tacit
knowledge and explicit knowledge. We call this interaction “knowledge conver-
sion” and this conversion occurs in four steps.
The SECI model is basically a two-dimensional matrix depicting four possible
scenarios of tacit and explicit knowledge interaction or conversion (see Fig. 3.1). In
essence, four knowledge conversion processes (Fig. 3.1) happen in the
knowledge-creating spiral, which are as follows:
1. Socialization (S)—From tacit to tacit
2. Externalization (E)—From tacit to explicit
3. Combination (C)—From explicit to explicit
4. Internalization (I)—From explicit to tacit
3.1 Nonaka Knowledge Creation Theory 31

3.1.1 Socialization

Socialization is the process of transferring tacit knowledge from one person to

another. The socialization process involves gathering knowledge and constructing it
in a social context. Individual tacit knowledge can be shared by several people
through interaction with natural environments and the experience of sharing a
common time and space with others. New tacit knowledge can be also created when
tacit knowledge interacts with other tacit knowledge. This process involves a dia-
logue between people to communicate vision and purposes, and the sharing of
knowledge and experience for formulating strategies. This gathering of knowledge
is often acquired formally through an educational process or informally by inter-
action with other people (Capel 2007).
A typical example of the socialization process is illustrated by the learning
process of novice teachers who learn from experienced teachers in a mentoring
system. The novice teachers accept the situation as it is by sharing and empathizing
with their mentors’ experience and absorbing tacit knowledge from the situation,
along with actions and perceptions. The novice teacher goes through a socialization
process in which his/her beliefs, attitudes, behaviours and teaching philosophies are
influenced. Formal and informal mentoring both play a significant part in the
socialization of novice teachers into teaching (Tan 2015).
Another example of socialization process can be demonstrated by Lesson Study,
which involves a group of teachers in a collective learning process to design and
evaluate a lesson plan for enhancing student learning. Participation in the design
and evaluation of lesson plan is a socialization process in which their tacit
knowledge can be shared and co-constructed through interaction (Marra 2004). In
Lesson Study, the lesson implementation is videotaped for detailed analysis in a
post-lesson meeting. In this post-lesson meeting, which takes place soon afterwards,
the teachers reflect on the lesson and suggest improvements. The collective learning
in these meetings is a socialization process in which tacit knowledge is extracted
and co-constructed through discussion and collaboration (Nicolini et al. 2003).
After the post-lesson meeting, a second teacher revises the lesson plan, taking into
account the suggestions and the post-test results, and teaches the revised lesson to
another class. This lesson will also be videotaped, discussed and revised. This
process is repeated until all the teachers have taught the lesson to their respective
classes. As tacit knowledge is situated in Lesson Study communities, it is acquired
through some form of participation, and continually reproduced and negotiated.
Socialization process can also occur in online discussion through synchronous
technologies such as instant messaging, audio and video-conferencing (Minocha
and Roberts 2008).
32 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

3.1.2 Externalization

Externalization is a process of articulating tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge

from dialogue to text records, in which the tacit knowledge can be codified in a
development plan. Knowledge externalization is a process of articulating tacit
knowledge in explicit concepts (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, p. 71). It is a perfect
knowledge creation process, to the extent that tacit knowledge becomes explicit and
expressed in the form of analogies, concepts, hypotheses or models. The tacit
knowledge accumulated in individuals is converted to explicit knowledge through
the channels of language and image. Tacit knowledge converted from explicit
knowledge can be developed into pedagogic content knowledge (PCK) of a group
or school. Furthermore, by being externalized, an idea that may be ambiguous in the
individual brain becomes clear in its focus, because it can be objectively understood
It is often the case that a new idea is born from it. However, we should consider that
tacit knowledge is not always transferred to group knowledge by externalization,
which depends on the context of individual experiences and situation.
Knowledge externalization happens in the evaluation meeting of the Lesson
Study when all teaching cycles of the Lesson Study are completed. It involves
triangulating data among test scores, student interview data and video analysis of
the teaching practice, with the aim of finding a relationship between how teachers
handled the subject and what the students learned. In the evaluation meeting,
teachers suggest further improvements and revise the lesson design for future ref-
erence. They are encouraged to reflect on what they have learned through the
Lesson Study by making a public presentation, thus turning their tacit knowledge
into transferable explicit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995). Finally, the
whole experience is written up as a case report, which becomes part of the school’s
transferable and shared inventory. The pedagogical content knowledge is codified
in the form of a teaching manual, meeting records and case report. Reflection and
knowledge externalization can be increased by engaging in reflection with other
people through dialogue (Hawkins 2010). As theory-driven evaluations help
externalize tacit knowledge into codified or explicit knowledge (Marra 2004),
Lesson Study group members may find it easier to evaluate and reflect on their
teaching by using their theoretical framework. For example, in the case of Learning
Study, which adopts variation theory as a guiding principle for instructional design,
members may find it easier to reflect on the pattern of variation. Reflection and
planning in a group can assist with the articulation and transference of tacit
knowledge. Teachers can reflect and externalize prior knowledge to plan for
learning activities.
With the development of information technology, more knowledge sharing will
take place in an online environment rather than in face-to-face meetings. This will
provide further opportunities to streamline the externalization process of group
meeting of Lesson Study. Yi (2006) finds that an online environment is an effective
tool for people to share and externalize tacit knowledge. Haag and Duan (2012)
have investigated personal knowledge development in online learning
3.1 Nonaka Knowledge Creation Theory 33

environments using a model adapted from Nonaka and colleagues’ SECI model.
They propose a modified version of the SECI model, extending its applicability
from the organizational to the individual level. Minocha and Roberts (2008) pro-
pose using a knowledge construction model as a framework for guiding the design
of collaborative activities in a 3D virtual world for blended learning environments.
Sigala and Chalkiti (2007) have examined the transformation of tacit knowledge
into business performance by developing a two-stage framework involving tacit
knowledge utilization and externalization processes. They found that tacit knowl-
edge externalization was critically important to enhancing organization perfor-
mance. Tacit knowledge utilization builds and uses the potential tacit knowledge
stock created through tacit knowledge externalization. Knowledge can also be
externalized in e-learning environments or electronic learning platforms through
information and communication technologies (Khan and Khader 2014). Group
meetings to externalize tacit knowledge can happen in an online environment.

3.1.3 Combination

Combination is the process of converting explicit group knowledge into a more

usable explicit organizational knowledge for a higher order collective. This is
critical for organizational development. Knowledge combination is a deliberative
design process that produces specific knowledge from the concept and an analytical
process, generating semantic knowledge by combining data, information and
knowledge. In the knowledge combination process, concepts are combined through
rational and logical thought, eliminating contradiction, to produce new and more
comprehensive knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, p. 73) define the com-
bination as a process to integrate knowledge systematically into an organizational
knowledge system as a knowledge asset. Individuals exchange and combine
knowledge through documents, meetings, phone calls or computer communication
networks. The reconfiguration of existing information through classification,
addition, combination and categorization of explicit knowledge (as in computer
databases) can lead to new knowledge.
In Lesson Study, the combination process may occur not only at the group level
but also at the individual level. For example, in planning a lesson, teachers work
together to choose the topic, define a research problem, and plan the lesson. This
collaborative process involves combining teachers’ own conceptual understanding
of the subject knowledge with the ways they have dealt with the subject knowledge
in the past. The combination of explicit knowledge allows teachers to design
learning activities that will reduce student learning difficulties.
For Nonaka, the combination process happens across different departments and
groups when they co-create and elicit higher level organizational knowledge.
Combination process is the most difficult process in any organization. It requires an
organizational learning culture that facilitates communication among different
departments to share knowledge. It also requires a shared vision to construct and
34 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

combine knowledge for organizational development. If the ‘systems thinking’

competency of the organization is not powerful enough, the knowledge cannot
easily be combined. Still less can it be applied in different departments to achieve
common organizational tasks or major concerns. In the Japanese Lesson Study
context, different departments work on their own Lesson Study with reference to the
schools’ major concerns. For example, the most common concern is to develop
problem-solving skills in students. The departments will all create PCK for their
own subjects through Lesson Study and then share their PCK with each other in
staff professional development activities or regular school level meetings. The
knowledge for addressing the major concern will be combined on these occasions
and further codified into school level documents, reports or teaching guidebooks for
dissemination and further application. The knowledge for curriculum implemen-
tation is higher level knowledge which has gone through a validation process by
each department focusing on the school curriculum. The knowledge creation carried
out by education and formal training in schools usually assumes this form.
Individuals can retrieve this higher level explicit knowledge and apply it
themselves.

3.1.4 Internalization

Internalization is the process by which the individual understands and absorbs the
collective explicit knowledge through practicing the explicit knowledge. It is a
mode that retransforms the organizational knowledge that has been externalized
into individual tacit knowledge. The organization’s formal knowledge that has been
created by the combination process is iteratively reconstructed, both in practice and
in one’s own mind. It is thus combined with one’s own situation and other
knowledge. As a result, the internalization process of accepting it as new “tacit
knowledge” happens. Internalization is not just practised. It should be conducted
subjectively and consciously.
The knowledge internationalization process involves the concept of learning by
doing: organizational explicit knowledge is learned by the individual through his or
her professional practices (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, p. 78). It is through inter-
nalization (of explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge) that knowledge is incor-
porated into the school’s operational activities to achieve a practical result. The
knowledge assets obtained in the aforementioned socialization, externalization, and
combination processes become valuable when they are internalized as individual
tacit knowledge. Learning by doing is an essential part of the internalization pro-
cess. In Lesson Study, the research lesson is taught by one of the teachers in the
group and observed by others. The teachers who enact the lesson plan and explicit
teaching theories can then understand and absorb the explicit knowledge and
internalize the tacit knowledge through enacting the lesson plan. Tacit knowledge is
accumulated by the owner through actually doing or through simulations. Enacting
the lesson plan is an internalization process that transfers school and team’s explicit
3.1 Nonaka Knowledge Creation Theory 35

knowledge to the individual. As teachers apply the knowledge shared in the lesson
planning to their teaching practices, the explicit knowledge is internalized as their
personal knowledge (Kolb 1984).
These four modes of socialization, externalization, combination and internal-
ization, as part of the knowledge convention process shown above, do not end with
one rotation. They create knowledge by repeating in an ascending knowledge
spiral. This SECI model creates personal professional knowledge. It is important
that the rotation is an ongoing process.

3.2 Research of SECI Model in the School Context

The SECI knowledge creation process provides an insight not only into how
individuals and organizations construct their own professional knowledge, but also
the content and nature of personal professional knowledge (Schaap et al. 2009).
Personal professional knowledge can be developed through an interrelated process
of internalization and socialization, in which teachers grow into the existing body of
shared knowledge and collective norms, values and beliefs of the teaching pro-
fession (Schaap et al. 2009). Lesson Study creates a personal knowledge base
through the internalization of professional knowledge and beliefs. This helps
teachers acquire declarative and procedural knowledge that can be specified and
applied to different professional situations. This personal professional knowledge,
developed through an interrelated process of internalization and socialization, can
also help preservice teachers grow into the existing body of shared knowledge: the
collective norms, values and beliefs of professionals in the occupational domain.
The Nonaka and Takeuchi SECI knowledge creation model has been adopted
widely to examine the knowledge process in educational organizations. The SECI
model has been adopted to facilitate teacher learning and knowledge building in
school education (Tee and Lee 2011; Tammets et al. 2013). As a recursive
knowledge creation mechanism, the SECI model makes it easier to create an
interactive dialogue (Palli and Lehtinen 2013). It also expedites the strategies,
practices and activities to create knowledge for crafting new strategies (Hoon 2007;
Marchiori and Bulgacov 2012). Wu et al. (2013) applied a case study method to
interview and observe members of an educational organization that was using the
SECI model, in order to explore the knowledge transfer and creation process of an
educational organization. They found that internal organizational knowledge flow
could be obtained through mutual interaction and sharing by the organization’s
members, strengthening the organization and the teaching skills of individual
members. Joia (2002) conducted a case study to evaluate a programme that uses the
SECI model to train in-service teachers without a teaching qualification in Brazilian
K-12 public schools. The programme gives these teachers the skills and expertise to
do their jobs. Joia found that only the socialization process (tacit to tacit knowledge)
of the SECI model worked well. This finding illustrates the tacit nature of teacher
knowledge that can be transferred via social learning.
36 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

Tee and Lee (2011) conducted a design-based study to explore how an impro-
vised, problem-based learning approach guided by Nonaka’s SECI model can help
in-service teachers cultivate technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK). They found that teachers believed that they did develop TPACK suc-
cessfully and that they became better positioned to use TPACK more fruitfully after
their mental models moved towards Biggs’s Level 2 and 3 approaches in teaching.
The SECI model created the condition for preservice teachers to create TPACK to
improve ineffective teaching practices. Wong (2015) adopted the Nonaka knowl-
edge conversion model as an analytical lens to examine how teachers developed
their knowledge in school-based learning activities. She found that teachers use
socialization and externalization to develop sympathized and conceptual knowl-
edge, respectively. On the other hand, successful internalization of this knowledge
to the point of it becoming operationally systematized is rare. The SECI model can
lead to both teacher development and school improvement by helping teachers
construct their ‘know-why’ knowledge.

3.3 Operating SECI Mechanism

Nonaka et al. (2000) propose a model to operate the SECI mechanism for
knowledge creation, as illustrated in Fig. 3.2. The model consists of four core
elements—knowledge leadership, knowledge assets, Ba and the SECI mechanism.
In this model, knowledge leadership is the driving force for the SECI knowledge
creation process. Knowledge leaders form and energize the Ba. Ba is the shared
context for knowledge creation, which can be conceptualized as knowledge sharing
culture, policy and practices. It is the culture and the conductive environment that

Fig. 3.2 Operating SECI

mechanism
3.3 Operating SECI Mechanism 37

enables people and groups to apply, share and create knowledge through the SECI
process. The leaders direct, promote and justify the SECI process to create
knowledge assets for organizational development. Knowledge assets are created in
the SECI mechanism through the conversion of tacit and explicit knowledge.
Knowledge assets take the form of staff competencies, effective organizational
policy and structure, positive and collaborative sharing culture and relationships
with stakeholders.
The model emphasizes the role of dialectical thinking by the organization’s
leadership in articulating the organization’s knowledge vision, as well as the
important role of middle management as knowledge producers in energizing Ba.
Using existing knowledge assets, an organization creates new knowledge through
the SECI process that takes place in Ba, where new knowledge, once created,
becomes, in turn, the basis for a new spiral of knowledge creation.
The knowledge creation theory is very comprehensive in the sense that, contrary
to the traditional view, it includes every single crucial factor (contextual environ-
ment, the SECI process, knowledge assets and knowledge leadership) as well as the
diversified (phenomenological, idealist, rational and pragmatic), dynamic and fluid
nature of knowledge.
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) point out that the basic conceptual structure of the
knowledge creation process management forms has two dimensions: the ontolog-
ical and the epistemological. The ontological dimension concerns knowledge cre-
ation in individuals and organizations. Knowledge can only be created by
individuals. An organization, by itself, cannot create knowledge. The organization
supports creative individuals and provides them with the conditions for creating
knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, p. 75). Organizational knowledge can only
develop from interactions that allow its creation by individuals and subsequent
dissemination to the organization as a whole. As per the research by Nonaka and
Takeuchi (1995), knowledge creation is a spiral process that starts with the creative
individual and spirals out to a wider community of interaction. The epistemological
dimension concerns the nature of knowledge.

3.4 Organization Factors for Institutionalizing the SECI

Model

Numerous KM research studies have been conducted in business and industrial

sectors to investigate the organizational factors conducive to implementing KM
practices and institutionalizing the SECI mechanism to manage knowledge.
Leadership style, organization culture, and knowledge strategies have been iden-
tified as the factors in KM implementation. Theories of transformational and
transactional leadership (Bass 1985) have been applied to explain how leadership
style affects the effectiveness of KM implementation in business and industrial
organizations (Bryant 2003; Birasnav 2014). A culture of trust, collaboration and
38 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

organizational learning have been identified as enablers of knowledge sharing

(Awad and Ghaziri 2004; Bock et al. 2005; Figurska 2012). IT support is recog-
nized as one of the key factors to enable knowledge sharing and eliminate distance
and time barriers. It also improves access to relevant knowledge in the minimum
amount of time (Davenport and Prusak 1998; Alavi and Leidner 1999). Aligning
knowledge strategies with business strategies has been identified as a factor in
effective KM implementation (Hansen et al. 1999; Zack 1999). However, the
effectiveness of the SECI model for knowledge creation is cultural and contextual
(Hong 2012). The knowledge is embedded in the context of the event and culture of
an organization (Glisby and Holden 2013). Since very few studies have been
conducted to identify the factors for institutionalizing a SECI mechanism in the
school context or to analyze its effect on improving strategic planning, the devel-
opment of a theoretical framework would be a positive contribution to this field.

3.4.1 Knowledge Leadership

Leadership plays a critical role in initiating the knowledge-creating process in an

organization. As illustrated in Fig. 3.2, the role of knowledge leaders is to create a
knowledge vision, cultivate a culture, and develop an environment that supports
knowledge sharing, and promotion and facilitation of the SECI process. Saito and
Masaaki (2012) describe a case of a Japanese junior high school principal who
cultivated a Lesson Study community to improve his school. The study focused on
how the principal’s leadership established a vision of reform, organized the com-
munity, and involved the entire school in overcoming problems in implementing
school reform. The principal placed top priority on making learning more collab-
orative and on including not only cognitive but also social and ethical aspects. He
subsequently implemented LSLC beyond subject boundaries, prioritizing joint
observation of, and reflection on, lessons. Furthermore, the principal interacted with
teachers individually and developed collegiality among the teachers and the
capacities of middle-level leaders.
Cheng and Ko (2012) conducted a case study to analyze the creation of a
Learning Study Community in an aided secondary school. They found that the
school leaders applied Kotter’s (1996) model to initiate change. Hall and Hord’s
(2006) strategies were also identified as supporting factors in creating a Learning
Study Community.
Von Krogh et al. (2012) argue that the study of organizational knowledge cre-
ation should investigate not only the roles of central, upper-echelon, leadership in
knowledge creation processes but also organizational context and knowledge assets.
They developed a framework for situational leadership in organizational knowledge
creation. This framework is based on a continuum that ranges from centralized to
distributed leadership at three layers of activity: a core layer of local knowledge
creation; a conditional layer that provides the resources and context for knowledge
3.4 Organization Factors for Institutionalizing the SECI Model 39

creation; and a structural layer that forms the overall frame and direction for
knowledge creation in the organization.
Zhang (2015) identified the strategies school leaders have utilized to overcome
challenges and sustain Lesson Study innovations in a Hong Kong primary school.
She found that the leadership team under study had adopted positive peer leadership
to implement Lesson Study activities successfully. She concludes by delineating the
implications for sustaining school development and professional development with
Lesson Study as well as a checklist of positive peer leadership practices for school
leaders, teacher leaders and teacher trainers.

3.4.2 Cultivating Ba for Knowledge Sharing

What is special in Nonaka’s theory of knowledge creation is its assertion that

knowledge needs a context in which to be created (Nonaka et al. 2000). The tradi-
tional view of knowledge highlights the absolute and context-free nature of knowl-
edge. However, Nonaka’s theory argues that people participate in knowledge
activities in a context-specific environment, which, in Nonaka’s term, is called ‘Ba’
(Fig. 3.3). Ba in Japanese means a shared space for emerging relationships. The space
may be physical place (physical Ba), online environments (virtual Ba) or even spaces
that allow room to nurture different ideologies (mental Ba). In terms of the knowledge
conversion process, there are four types of Ba: Originating Ba, Dialoguing Ba,
Exercising Ba, and Cyber Ba.
Originating Ba is the place where individuals share feelings, emotions, experi-
ences and mental models (Nonaka and Konno 1998). Originating Ba is a physical
place that enables people to meet face-to-face and share experiences. It should be a
high-trust environment in which individuals feel safe sharing anything, and in
which people are willing to remove their communication barriers and empathize
with others for the conversion and transfer of tacit knowledge. It is important that
school leaders cultivate a school culture of trust and safety, and accept that com-
mitting mistakes is a learning opportunity.

Fig. 3.3 Four characteristics Socialization Externalization

of Ba
Face to face activities Peer to peer activities

Originating Ba Interactive Ba

In the school activities Group to group activities

Exercising Ba Cyber Ba

Internalization Combination
40 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

Interacting Ba is an environment conducive to collective reflection and profes-

sional dialogue. Compared with the originating Ba, interacting Ba is more con-
sciously constructed, perhaps as a formal team meeting. Interacting Ba provides a
place for people from the same department to engage in creating meaning and
value. Professional dialogue is the key for such conversions. Using metaphors in
the conversion helps the group leverage individual tacit knowledge into group
knowledge. Through professional dialogue in the Lesson Study meeting their
mental models regarding teaching and learning are converted into common terms,
concepts and even pedagogical content knowledge.
Cyber Ba is an online environment conducive to knowledge combination.
Providing online networks, groupware, documentation and databases for managing
knowledge will help to develop cyber Ba. The combination of explicit knowledge
will be supported most efficiently in an organization where the members are
devoted to the knowledge vision and have developed a sense of systems thinking.
In terms of Lesson Study conducted in a school organization, a whole-school
workshop could accommodate all the teachers in a school to encourage knowledge
combination.
Exercising Ba is an environment that allows the staff to exercise their profes-
sional practices to internalize the organization’s explicit knowledge as their tacit
knowledge. Exercising Ba supports the knowledge internalization process through
encouraging practice of the organization guidelines to convert organizational
knowledge into individual tacit knowledge. Such practices may be supervised by
senior mentors and colleagues and carried out under organization routines. In term
Lesson Study, the professional practices of peer lesson observation and mentoring
are examples of exercising Ba. The internalization of knowledge is continuously
enhanced by the use of pedagogical knowledge in teachers’ teaching practices.
Nonaka suggests that in order to make knowledge creation happen, leaders have
to intentionally develop thriving work and learning environments (Ba) that foster
the continuous creation of knowledge. (Cyber Ba/meeting Physical Ba)

3.4.3 Organizational Culture

Many studies have shown organizational culture to be a factor for successful

institutionalization of Lesson Study Communities. Howell and Saye (2016)
examined whether scaffolded Lesson Study might contribute to the emergence of a
shared professional teaching knowledge culture among fourth-grade social studies
teachers. They found that Lesson Study could be used to develop a shared pro-
fessional teaching knowledge culture among fourth-grade social studies teachers.
However, a combination of factors can also contribute to variations in participation
in that shared professional teaching knowledge culture, including the degree to
which the teachers embraced the public nature of Lesson Study. These factors
include the teachers’ idiosyncratic views of teaching and learning, their individual
3.4 Organization Factors for Institutionalizing the SECI Model 41

tolerance for socially constructing curricula, and the degree to which they accede to
cultural obstacles in elementary schooling.
Groves et al. (2016) investigated Japanese Lesson Study as a model for teacher
professional learning in the Australian context, as well as critical factors in adapting
and implementing of structured problem-solving mathematics lessons effectively.
They found that opportunities for in-depth lesson planning, the presence of many
observers at the research lessons and post-lesson discussions, and the insight pro-
vided by the “knowledgeable other”, were critical factors contributing to the suc-
cess of the project. The difficulty in finding suitable problem-solving tasks to match
the Australian curriculum, and the teaching culture that emphasizes small-group
rather than whole-class teaching were identified as major constraints.
Marlon and Max (2014) report an adaptability study on the transferability of
Japanese Lesson Study for use in the Philippines. They applied Hofstede’s
dimensions of national culture to identify and analyze incongruities in cultural
orientation between Japanese and Philippine teachers. Hofstede’s dimensions of
national culture may explain the adaptations needed to implement Lesson Study in
Philippine schools. They found that sensitivity to cultural challenges during the
process of adaptation was important in increasing the chances of successful
implementation.
Collaboration among teachers has been identified as one of the most important
features of a school culture that fosters professional development, teacher satis-
faction, teacher effectiveness, and student achievement within a school (Puchner
and Taylor 2006, p. 924). Recently, Stigler and Hiebert (2016) have examined the
organizational support required to sustain the practice of Lesson Study in various
contexts, and the benefits that may be derived from making the connections
between Lesson Study and the wider field of improvement science more explicit.
They found that the process of importing cultural routines could benefit both the
research and practice of Lesson Study.

3.5 The SECI Model in School Organization

Nonaka and Takeuchi’s model of four modes of knowledge conversion can be

applied in schools to explain how teachers share their tacit and explicit knowledge
through Lesson Study.
The application of the SECI model to schools is illustrated by the Lesson Study.
The SECI model can be adopted to create pedagogical knowledge by building a
knowledge sharing platform or knowledge management system. School leaders
should nurture a set of conditions that support and sustain the knowledge creation
process (e.g. creating an organizational learning culture, developing teacher PKM
competency, cultivating a professional learning community, and institutionalizing a
knowledge management system).
In Takeuchi and Nonaka’s (2004) discourse, knowledge management is framed
as a management perspective, not merely a set of tools and methods to leverage
42 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

knowledge. They believe that knowledge management should be at the centre of

management’s tasks in a fast-changing, complex and uncertain world. They also
state that since knowledge creation is at the heart of management in today’s
knowledge society, their model serves as a universal model for management at
large.
Lesson Study communities are critical for schools to address the knowledge gap
for curriculum implementation. Lesson Study communities and knowledge dis-
semination by mentors and experienced teachers are essential for improving
teaching and learning. Through these communities, knowledge can be amplified or
crystallized by discussion, experience sharing and observation. The communities
provide a common context for teaching in which individual teachers can interact
with one another. The teachers create new perspectives through dialogue and
debate, involving substantial conflicts and divergences. This type of dynamic
interaction makes personal knowledge transformation at the school level easier.
The interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge can be expanded to higher
ontological levels if schools value the practical experience of each teacher. The
knowledge spiral can be used to explain this interaction. Initially, the socialization
develops a field of interaction that enables teachers to share experiences. From the
externalization, dialogue or collective reflection is generated, using metaphors or
analogies, and this, in turn, generates the teaching concept. The combination mode
combines the newly created knowledge with already existing knowledge, which
results in a new process, system or mode of action.

3.6 Summary

This chapter has adopted Nonaka and Tateuchi’s (1995) SECI (socialization,
externalization, combination and internalization) knowledge creation model as a
theoretical framework to discuss the tacit and explicit knowledge convention and
creation processes in Lesson Study. It has also explored factors critical for suc-
cessful institutionalization of Lesson Study in schools. Unpacking the mechanism
of the knowledge management process and the practices embedded in Lesson Study
can help school leaders and teachers better design teacher professional learning
activities consistent with the spirit of Lesson Study in the context of their school
cultures.

References

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges, and
benefits. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 1(7), 1–37.
Awad, E. M., & Ghaziri, H. M. (2004). Knowledge management. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson.
References 43

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Birasnav, M. (2014). Knowledge management and organizational performance in the service
industry: The role of transformational leadership beyond the effects of transactional
leadership. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1622–1629.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in
knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces,
and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111.
Bryant, S. E. (2003). The role of transformational and transactional leadership in creating, sharing
and exploiting organizational knowledge. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies,
9, 32–44.
Capel, S. (2007). Moving beyond physical education subject knowledge to develop knowledge-
able teachers of the subject. Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 493–507.
Cheng, E. C. K., & Ko, P. Y. (2012). Leadership strategies for creating a Learning Study
community. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 9(1), 161–180.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they
know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Figurska, I. (2012). Cultural aspects of knowledge management. Human Resources Management
and Ergonomics, 6, 66–77.
Glisby, M., & Holden, N. (2013). Contextual constraints in KM theory: The Cultural
embeddedness of Nonaka’s knowledge creating company. Knowledge and Process
Management, 10(1), 29–36.
Groves, S., Doig, B., Vale, C., & Widjaja, W. (2016). Critical Factors in the Adaptation and
Implementation of Japanese Lesson Study in the Australian Context. ZDM: The International
Journal on Mathematics Education, 48(4), 501–512.
Haag, M., & Duan, Y. (2012). Understanding personal knowledge development in online learning
environments: An instrument for measuring externalisation, combination and internalisation.
The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management., 10(1), 39–47.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2006). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Hansen, M., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. (1999). What’s your strategy for managing knowledge?
Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 106–116.
Hawkins, L. A. (2010). The knowledge externalisation cycle (KnEx): Development of a systematic
cyclic research method to guide researchers. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 4, 54–61.
Hislop, D. (2013). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction (3rd ed.).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hong, J. K. L. (2012). Globalizing Nonaka’s knowledge creation model: Issues and challenges.
Management Learning, 43(2), 199–215.
Hoon, C. (2007). Committees as strategic practice: The role of strategic conversation in a public
administration. Human Relations, 60(6), 921–952.
Howell, J. B., & Saye, J. W. (2016). Using lesson study to develop a shared professional teaching
knowledge culture among 4th grade social studies teachers. Journal of Social Studies
Research, 40(1), 25–37.
Joia, L. A. (2002). Assessing unqualified in-service teacher training in Brazil using knowledge
management theory: A case study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(1), 74–86.
Khan, A. A., & Khader, S. A. (2014). An approach for externalization of expert tacit knowledge
using a query management system in an e-learning environment. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(6), 257–274.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development.
Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Marchiori, M., & Bulgacov, S. (2012). Strategy as communicational practice in organizations.
International Journal of Strategic Communication, 6(3), 199–211.
Marlon, E., & Max, S. (2014). Cultural challenges in adapting Lesson Study to a Philippines
setting. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 16(1), 1–25.
44 3 Applying SECI Model for Creating Pedagogical Knowledge

Marra, M. (2004). The contribution of evaluation to socialization and externalization of tacit

knowledge. Evaluation, 10(3), 263–283.
Minocha, S., & Roberts, D. (2008). Pedagogical effectiveness of wikis and blogs in E-learning
environments. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16(2), 272–306.
Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., & Yanow, D. (Eds.). (2003). Knowing in organizations: A
practice-based approach. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “ba” Building a foundation for knowledge
creation. California Management Review, 40, 40–54.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company. New York: Oxford
University Press.
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.
Palli, & Lehtinen. (2013). How organizational strategy is realized in situated interaction.
A conversation analytical study of a management meeting. LSP Journal, 4(2), Downloaded
from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.836.2696&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Puchner, L. D., & Taylor, A. R. (2006). Lesson study, collaboration and teacher efficacy: Stories from
two school-based math lesson study groups. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 922–934.
Saito, E., & Masaaki, S. (2012). Lesson study as an instrument for school reform: A case of
Japanese practices. Management in Education, 26(4), 181–186.
Schaap, H., De Bruijn, E., Van der Schaaf, M. F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). Students’ personal
professional theories in competence-based vocational education: The construction of personal
knowledge through internalisation and socialisation. Journal of Vocational Education and
Training, 61(4), 481–494.
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.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2016). Lesson Study, improvement, and the importing of cultural
routines, ZDM. The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 48(4), 581–587.
Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (2004). Hitotsubashi on knowledge management. Wiley.
Tammets, K., Pata, K., & Laanpere, M. (2013). Promoting teachers’ learning and knowledge
building in the socio-technical system. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distance Learning, 14(3), 251–272.
Tan, J. (2015). Examining the socialisation of new teachers through the lenses of positioning
theory and micropolitical theory. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(1), 177–188.
Tee, M. Y., & Lee, S. S. (2011). From socialisation to internalisation: Cultivating technological
pedagogical content knowledge through problem-based learning. Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, 27(1), 89–104.
Von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Rechsteiner, L. (2012). Leadership in organizational knowledge
creation: A review and framework. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 240–277.
Wong, J. L. N. (2015). How do teachers learn through engaging in school-based teacher learning
activities? Applying a knowledge conversion perspective. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,
24(1), 45–55.
Wu, W. L., Lee, Y. C., & Shu, H. S. (2013). Knowledge management in education organization: a
perspective of knowledge spiral. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 5(4),
7–13.
Yi, J. (2006). Externalization of tacit knowledge in online environments. International Journal on
E-Learning, 5(4), 663–674.
Zack, M. H. (1999). Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3),
25–45.
Zhang, Y. F. (2015). Sustaining Lesson Study in schools with positive peer leadership. International
Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 4(2), 140–154.