Knowledge in our hands: Analytical tools for craft knowledge communication | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Craft Sciences
  • ISSN: 2040-4689
  • E-ISSN: 2040-4697

Abstract

Craft knowledge is built from examples of experiential knowledge, and when individual or group experiences are gathered and compared, new knowledge is created. This requires socialization between practitioners or a systematic collection of practice descriptions, such as in a manual. However, there is always a risk that knowledge that is difficult to put into words will never be captured or communicated. The aim of this article is to show how theoretical frameworks can be used as analytical tools to help us develop methods that support the communication of craft knowledge. Using a research-through-practice approach in the field of horticulture combined with frameworks based on Bengt Molander’s concept of three knowledge orientations and Nonaka and Takeuchi’s knowledge conversation criteria (SECI-model), I will discuss how it is possible to make practitioners’ subjective knowledge more readily available to others.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00078_1
2022-09-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Almevik, G.. ( 2016;), ‘ From archive to living heritage: Participatory documentation methods in crafts. ’, in A. Palmsköld,, J. Rosenqvist, and G. Almevik. (eds), Crafting Cultural Heritage, Gothenburg:: University of Gothenburg;, pp. 7799.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Almevik, G.,, Groth, C., and Westerlund, T.. ( 2022;), ‘ Explorations in the craft sciences. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis;, pp. 218.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ehn, B.. ( 2014;), ‘ Komma åt detaljerna: Att intervjua, observera och skriva om traditionella hantverkskunskaper. ’ (‘Access the details: Interviewing, observing and writing about traditional craftsmanship’), in G. Almevik,, S. Höglund, and A. Winbladh. (eds), Hantverkare emellan, Mariestad:: Hantverkslaboratoriet, University of Gothenburg;, pp. 3043.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Fourcade, M.. ( 2010;), ‘ The problem of embodiment in the sociology of knowledge: Afterword to the special issue on knowledge in practice. ’, Qualitative Sociology, 33:4, pp. 56974.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gherardi, S., and Perrotta, M.. ( 2016;), ‘ Re-thinking induction in practice: Profession, peer group and organization in contention. ’, Society and Business Review, 11:2, pp. 193209.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Groth, C.. ( 2022;), ‘ Video as a tool for knowing and telling in practice-led craft research. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis;, pp. 4866.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Groth, C.,, Mäkelä, M., and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P.. ( 2015;), ‘ Tactile augmentation: A multimethod for capturing experiential knowledge. ’, Craft Research, 6:1, pp. 5781.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ingold, T.. ( 2013), Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ingold, T.. ( 2018;), ‘ Five questions of skill. ’, Cultural Geographies, 25:1, pp. 15963.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Kaiser, M.. ( 2000), Hva er vitenskap? (‘What is science?’), Oslo:: Universitetsforlaget;.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Källbom, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ Painting treatments of weather-exposed ferrous heritage: Exploration of oil varnish paints and painting skills. ’, Ph.D. thesis, Gothenburg:: University of Gothenburg;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Karlsson, T.. ( 2013), Ramverksdörr: en studie i bänksnickeri (‘Framed doors: A study in carpentry’), Gothenburg:: University of Gothenburg;.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kokko, S.,, Almevik, G.,, Bentz Høgseth, H. C., and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P.. ( 2020;), ‘ Mapping the methodologies of the craft sciences in Finland, Sweden and Norway. ’, Craft Research, 11:2, pp. 177209.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Lave, J.. ( 2008;), ‘ Epilogue: Situated Learning and changing practice. ’, in A. Amin, and J. Roberts. (eds), Community, Economic Creativity, and Organization, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 28396.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lave, J., and Wenger, E.. ( 1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, New York:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Mäkelä, M., and Nimkulrat, N.. ( 2018;), ‘ Documentation as a practice-led research tool for reflection on experiential knowledge. ’, FormAkademisk: Forskningstidsskrift for Design Og Designdidaktikk, 11:2, pp. 116.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Merleau-Ponty, M.. ( [1945] 2012), Phénoménologie de la perception, Paris:: Gallimard;. Rpt. as Phenomenology of Perception (trans. D. A. Landes), New York: Routledge .
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Molander, B.. ( 2015), The Practice of Knowing and Knowing in Practices, Frankfurt am Main:: Peter Lang Edition;.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Molander, B.. ( 2017;), ‘ Tankens frihet och längtan efter verklighet: om “teori” som begrepp och retorik. ’ (‘Freedom of thought and the longing for reality: About “theory” as an idea, a concept, and rhetoric’), in G. Almevik. (ed.), Hantverksvetenskap, Mariestad:: Hantverkslaboratoriet, University of Gothenburg;, pp. 1436. Rpt. in English in T. Westerlund, C. Groth and G. Almevik (eds) (2022), Craft Sciences, pp. 374–96 , https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2ngx5xd. Accessed 1 August 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Molander, B.. ( 2022;), ‘ Freedom of thought and the longing for reality: About “theory” as an idea, a concept, and rhetoric. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis;, pp. 37495.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Niedderer, K., and Imani, Y.. ( 2009;), ‘ Developing a framework for managing tacit knowledge in research using knowledge management models. ’, Undisciplined! Design Research Society Conference 2008, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, 16–19 July 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Niedderer, K., and Reilly, L.. ( 2010;), ‘ Research practice in art and design: Experiential knowledge and organised inquiry. ’, Journal of Research Practice, 6:2, pp. 111.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H.. ( 1995), The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. O’Connor, E.. ( 2017;), ‘ Touching tacit knowledge: Handwork as ethnographic method in a glassblowing studio. ’, Qualitative Research, 17:2, pp. 21730.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pink, S.. ( 2009;), Doing Sensory Ethnography. , Los Angeles, CA:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Polanyi, M.. ( [1966] 2009), The Tacit Dimension, Chicago, IL:: University of Chicago Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rust, C.. ( 2004;), ‘ Design enquiry: Tacit knowledge and invention in science. ’, Design Issues, 20:4, pp. 7685.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schön, D. A.. ( [1995] 2003), The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Aldershot:: Arena;.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Seiler, J.,, Eriksson, L.,, Westerlund, T., and Almevik, G.. ( 2021;), ‘ Ways of tacit knowing: A film article. ’, FormAkademisk: forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 14:2, n.pag.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Sennett, R.. ( 2008), The Craftsman, New Haven, CT and London:: Yale University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Tanaka, S.. ( 2013;), ‘ The notion of embodied knowledge and its range. ’, Encyclopaedia, XVII:37, pp. 4766.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Thane, G.. ( 2022;), ‘ Understanding through blacksmithing techniques. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis;, pp. 33448.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tilley, C.. ( 2006;), ‘ The sensory dimensions of gardening. ’, Science and Society, 1:3, pp. 31130.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Tsoukas, H.. ( 2003;), ‘ Do we really understand tacit knowledge?. ’, in M. Easterby-Smith, and M. A. Lyles. (eds), The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Knowledge Management, Oxford:: Blackwell;, pp. 41027.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Westerlund, T.. ( 2017;), ‘ Trädgårdsmästarens förökningsmetoder: dokumentation av hantverkskunskap. ’ (‘The gardener’s propagation methods: Documentation of craft knowledge’), Ph.D. thesis, Gothenburg:: University of Gothenburg;.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Westerlund, T.. ( 2022;), ‘ Classification of plant propagation practice. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis;, pp. 35070.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Wood, N.. ( 2014;), ‘ Silent witness: Using video to record and transmit tacit knowledge in creative practices. ’, in G. Almevik,, S. Höglund, and A. Winbladh. (eds), Hantverkare emellan, Mariestad:: Hantverkslaboratoriet, University of Gothenburg;, pp. 5669.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Westerlund, Tina. ( 2022;), ‘ Knowledge in our hands: Analytical tools for craft knowledge communication. ’, Craft Research, 13:2, pp. 23759, https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00078_1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00078_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00078_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error