IJAT Vol.12 No.4 pp. 553-563
doi: 10.20965/ijat.2018.p0553


Consideration of Tacit Knowledge Sharing by Automation for Reinforcement of Human Abilities: Empirical Comparison of Conservation Techniques Between Japan and Denmark

Sadayo Hirata*,† and Mika Yasuoka**

*Graduate School of Engineering Management, Shibaura Institute of Technology
3-9-14 Shibaura, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-5848, Japan

Corresponding author

**DTU Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark

December 22, 2017
May 14, 2018
Online released:
July 3, 2018
July 5, 2018
conservation, ethnographical inquiry, intelligent system, management of technology, tacit knowledge

It is vital for cultural properties to be passed down between generations. Therefore, this study focuses on conservation techniques and discusses a system that provides appropriate automation to prevent the destruction of the value of cultural properties and conservation techniques. Manufacturing companies have improved productivity by rapidly replacing humans with machines. Because of this, the techniques of skilled persons who have gained experience with products over time by maintaining and repairing them are not being inherited by their successors. This has resulted in many manufacturers ceasing production or going out of business. Cultural properties are strongly associated with tradition and tacit knowledge. This makes it more difficult to maintain and reproduce them than common products. Thus, rather than a simple replacement of people and machines, support through applying automation that enhances human abilities is required. This study investigates Japan and a developed country, Denmark, in terms of conservation. On the basis of mutual understanding gained by investigating the state of mutual conservation in the two countries, we summarize the problems and efforts related to tacit knowledge sharing. We used a qualitative research method called ethnographical inquiry to find tacit knowledge underlying the techniques and influences of culture in Japan and Denmark. This study features empirical findings on the appropriate use of both automation that replaces humans with machines and automation that enhances human abilities.

Cite this article as:
S. Hirata and M. Yasuoka, “Consideration of Tacit Knowledge Sharing by Automation for Reinforcement of Human Abilities: Empirical Comparison of Conservation Techniques Between Japan and Denmark,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.12, No.4, pp. 553-563, 2018.
Data files:
  1. [1] KADK, “Evaluation fo the Research at the School of Conservation,” Final Report, 2002.
  2. [2] “The Royal Danish Academiy of Fine Arts,” [Accessed Septempber 30, 2017]
  3. [3] H. Otake and Y. Futagami, “Training for a coservator-restorer in western countries: Qualification of “restorer of cultural properties” in Italy,” Science for conservation, Vol.43, pp. 133-145, 2003 (in Japanese).
  4. [4] J. Blomberg, J. Giacomi, A. Mosher, and P. Swenton-Wall, “Ethnographic Field Methods and Their Relation to Design,” Participatory Design: Principles and Practices, D. Schuler and A. Namioka (Eds.), pp. 123-155, L. Erlbaum Associates, 1993.
  5. [5] R. Legard, J. Keegan, and K. Ward, “In-depth Interviews,” Qualitative Research Practice – A Guide for Social Science Students, J. Ritchie and J. Lewis (Eds.), Chapter 6, pp. 139-169, Sage Publications, 2003.
  6. [6] F. Kensing and J. Blomberg, “PD: issues and concerns,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol.7, pp. 167-185, 1998.
  7. [7] S. Hirata, “An emprical study of value creation of multi-product small-volume production through industry-academia collaboration,” Proc. of IEEE IEEM2017, IEEM17-P-0541, 2017 IEEE Int. Conf. on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singaopre, 2017.
  8. [8] S. Miura, “On Code of Ethics,” Bunkazai Hozon Shufuku Gakkaishi, Vol.55, pp. 1-6, 2010.
  9. [9] J. Blomberg, M. Burrell, and G. Guest, “An ethnographic approach to design,” The human-computer interaction handbook, J. A. Jacko and A. Sears (Eds.), L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., pp. 964-986, 2002.
  10. [10] S. Hirata and H. Osada, “Analysis of Work Style in Operation & Maintenance of Information System,” Proc. of IEEE IEEM2009, ISBN:0-7803-8741-4, IEEM09-P-1091, 2009 IEEE Int. Conf. on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Hongkong, 2009.
  11. [11] S. Hirata, “Requirement development and project management by ethnography,” Introduction to Strategic Technology Management 4 – Chapter 3, Tokyo: Fuyo Shobo Publication, pp. 77-113, 2016.
  12. [12] S. Hirata, “Human resource development project for services by ethnography,” The 4th Int. Conf. of Serviceology Proc., 2016.
  13. [13] P. Ehn, “Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts,” Erlbaum, 1988.
  14. [14] M. Yasuoka, “Collaboration Support in the Initial Collaboration Phase,” Proc. of Participatory Design Conf. 2006, Vol.2, pp. 129-132, 2006.
  15. [15] M. Yasuoka, “Collaboration across professional boundaries – the emergence of interpretation drift and the collective creation of project jargon,” J. of Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol.24, No.4, pp. 253-276, 2015.
  16. [16] J. Greenbaum and M. Kyng (Eds.), “Design at Work” Cooperative Design of Computer Systems, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1991.
  17. [17] D. Schuler and A. Namioka, “PD: Principles and practices,” Erlbaum, 1993.
  18. [18] M. Yasuoka and T. Ohno, “Impact of Constraints and Rules of User Involvement Methods for IS Concept Creation and Specification,” Proc. of the 6th Scandinavian Conf. on Information Systems, Scis 2015, Oulu, Finland, August 9-12, pp. 220-236, 2015.
  19. [19] M. Yasuoka, M. Nakatani, and T. Ohno, “Towards culturally independent participatory design method,” 2013 Int. Conf. on Culture and Computing, pp. 92-97, 2013.
  20. [20] M. Yasuoka, K. Kadoya, and T. Niwa, “Introducing a game approach towards IS requirements specification,” 2014 47th Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 3687-3696, 2014.
  21. [21] J. Kawakita, “An Idea Development Method,” Chuokoron-sha, 1967 (in Japanese).
  22. [22] J. McGonigal, “Reality is Broken, Why Games Make Us Better and How They can Change the World,” Penguin Books, 2011.
  23. [23] A. Fleury, “Drawing and acting as user experience research tools,” APCHI, pp. 269-278, 2012.
  24. [24] S. Titta, K. Mehto, T. Kankainen, and V. Kantola, “Drama and user-centered methods in design,” Inclusive Design, pp. 5-8, 2005.
  25. [25] A. L. Strauss and J. M. Corbin, “Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory,” Sage Publications, 1998.
  26. [26] K. Charmaz, “Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis,” Sage Publications, 2006.
  27. [27] H. Kiumura, “Developing Innovative IT-based Full Mold Casting,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.2, No.4, pp. 289-296, 2008.
  28. [28] M. Fukihara, H. Makino, and K. Hashimoto, “Automation in Green Sand Processing Equipment,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.2, No.4, pp. 80-84, 2008.
  29. [29] K. Terashima, T. Miyoshi, and Y. Noda, “Innovatie Automation Technologies and IT Applications of the Metal Casting Process Necessary for the Foundries of 21st Century,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.2, No.4, pp. 229-239, 2008.
  30. [30] Y. Nagasaka, “Automation and Process Management in Foundry,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.2, No.4, pp. 266-275, 2008.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Jul. 19, 2018