A method for eliciting tacit knowledge. In selecting individuals to interview, it is important to identify a sample that is likely to possess a certain amount of tacit knowledge. We seek to identify individuals who are both experienced and successful in their domain. Individuals who are more successful likely have acquired some important knowledge relevant to success that individuals who are less successful have not. Furthermore, individuals who are currently practicing in the domain of interest are more appropriate sources for understanding the tacit knowledge of that domain than are individuals who hold other positions (e.g., supervisor) or previously held the position of interest. The latter may consider different knowledge to be relevant, based on their different perspectives. Once a relevant pool of practitioners is identified, experts can be chosen either through nominations (e.g., by peers or superiors) or based on existing performance criteria (e.g., performance evaluation, salary). In research by Sternberg and his colleagues (Hedlund et al., 1999; Sternberg et al., 1993; Sternberg et al., 1995; Wagner, 1987), interviews were conducted with academic psychologists deemed successful based on their tenure and affiliation (e.g., full professors at Yale); business managers who were considered successful on the basis of their position in the company; salespersons who were successful in their sales performance; successful college students selected based on grades and school affiliation; and successful military leaders identified through a nomination process.

All of these experts were asked to consider what it takes to succeed in their respective domains and to provide typical performance-related situations and possible responses to those situations that exemplify tacit knowledge. In recent research, we have developed a structured interview in which participants are provided with more explicit instructions about the knowledge we seek to identify and which prompts them to elicit more in-depth responses.

We rely generally on a two-person interview team, with one person designated as the lead interviewer and the other the notetaker. The lead interviewer directs the interview and the notetaker takes written notes, asks for clarification, and, along with the lead interviewer, asks follow-up questions. The interviews also are taped when possible, with the interviewees' consent, so that questions and clarifications can be addressed once the interview is completed. It is also helpful for one of the interviewers to be familiar with the domain in order to understand any technical language or the jargon of the interviewee.

We present below a protocol for conducting the interviews. We use specific examples from our work with military leaders to illustrate the steps involved.

1. Introduction. When the participant arrives, members of the interview team introduce themselves and give a standardized introduction to the study and the interview. This introduction should state the purpose of the research, preempt likely misunderstandings, and orient the participant to the purpose of the interview. For example:

   We are trying to understand the key lessons that leaders acquire from their experience on the job. If we can identify these lessons, we will try to find ways to use them to strengthen leader development efforts.

   This is not an evaluation of you as a leader. This is not a study comparing leaders from your organization to those from another organization.

   We want to identify specific examples of informal knowledge about leadership at your level. We want to find examples of things about leadership that are not written in books or taught in classes. Our belief is that this knowledge is often not discussed openly, but nevertheless is used by leaders as they meet the demands of their jobs. This knowledge may have been learned because of some challenge or problem you faced. It may have been acquired by watching someone else's successes or failures.

   We are not interested in the "party line" or "doctrine." We also are not interested in the purely technical things you learned from experience (e.g., how to tune up an engine). We are really interested in the problems and challenges you face and what you have learned about leadership at your level from these experiences.

2. Request for stories. The purpose of the interview is to elicit stories or cases from the participants' experiences and to explore the unspoken, practical knowledge gained from or reflected in those cases. We ask participants, for example, to:

   "Tell us a story about a leadership experience you have had as a leader in your current position from which you learned a lesson."