Lost in Rotation: The Erosion of Tacit Engineering Knowledge in Indonesia’s State-Owned Defense Enterprises
Abstract
Organizations that are heavily focused on engineering depend significantly on tacit engineering knowledge that is built up through experience, practice, and ongoing engagement in intricate technological processes. Although practices such as personnel rotation, workforce mobility, reassignment, and retirement are prevalent in workforce management, they can pose challenges to the continuity of knowledge when essential expertise is not adequately conveyed. This concern is especially pertinent in state-owned defense enterprises, where the retention of accumulated organizational knowledge is crucial for specialized engineering capabilities and lengthy technology development cycles. This research investigated the types of tacit engineering knowledge that are most susceptible to loss, the ways in which personnel rotation leads to knowledge degradation, and the organizational consequences and strategies for knowledge retention related to these dynamics. A qualitative multiple-case study approach was utilized, drawing on secondary documentary data from annual reports, corporate documents, industry reports, government publications, and previous academic research. The analysis concentrated on three Indonesian state-owned defense companies: PT Pindad, PT PAL Indonesia, and PT Dirgantara Indonesia. Thematic analysis and cross-case comparisons were employed to uncover recurring themes. The results reveal that manufacturing know-how, troubleshooting skills, system integration expertise, and accumulated production experience are particularly at risk of erosion. Knowledge discontinuities were linked to personnel reassignment, organizational transfers, retirement, movements related to promotions, and project mobility, particularly when structured transfer mechanisms were lacking. These disruptions were associated with interruptions in capability, ongoing learning initiatives, variations in quality, and inefficiencies in operations. The results underscore the significance of knowledge mapping, succession planning, organized mentoring, practice communities, and knowledge repositories in facilitating the continuity of engineering capabilities. The research concludes that while personnel rotation is not necessarily harmful, engineering-focused organizations might gain from achieving a balance between workforce mobility and systematic approaches that maintain and convey essential tacit engineering knowledge.
Downloads
References
Azungah, T. (2018). Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis. Qualitative Research Journal, 18(4), 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-D-18-00035
Borges, R., Bernardi, M., & Petrin, R. (2018). Cross-country findings on tacit knowledge sharing: evidence from the Brazilian and Indonesian IT workers. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(4), 742–762. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2018-0234
Burmeister, A., & Deller, J. (2016). Knowledge Retention From Older and Retiring Workers: What Do We Know, and Where Do We Go From Here? Work, Aging and Retirement, 2(2), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw002
Calle, M., Gonzalez-R, P. L., Andrade, J. L., Leon-Blanco, J. M., & Canca, D. (2025). Workload control in dual-resource constrained flexible job shops: a simulation analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 63(20), 7363–7385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2025.2496976
Caroline Martins, E., & Meyer, H. W. J. (2012). Organizational and behavioral factors that influence knowledge retention. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(1), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271211198954
Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019
Cegarra-Navarro, J.-G., Soto-Acosta, P., & Wensley, A. K. P. (2016). Structured knowledge processes and firm performance: The role of organizational agility. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1544–1549. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.014
Damayanti, D., & Ratnasih, C. (2025). Strategic Innovation in Economic Development and Defense Industries: Harnessing Technology for Industrial Growth and Security Policy. In AI-Powered Leadership: Transforming Organizations in the Digital Age (pp. 195–220). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-1687-1.ch007
Durst, S., & Zieba, M. (2019). Mapping knowledge risks: towards a better understanding of knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 17(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2018.1538603
Ellinger, A. D., & McWhorter, R. (2016). Qualitative case study research as empirical inquiry. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), 7(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2016070101
Ferreira, J., Mueller, J., & Papa, A. (2018). Strategic knowledge management: theory, practice and future challenges. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(2), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2018-0461
Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. (2019). Microfoundations in international management research: The case of knowledge sharing in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(9), 1594–1621. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00270-4
Foster, William M, Hassard, John S, Morris, Jonathan, & Wolfram Cox, Julie. (2019). The changing nature of managerial work: The effects of corporate restructuring on management jobs and careers. Human Relations, 72(3), 473–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726719828439
Garcia-Perez, A., Ghio, A., Occhipinti, Z., & Verona, R. (2020). Knowledge management and intellectual capital in knowledge-based organisations: a review and theoretical perspectives. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(7), 1719–1754. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2019-0703
Hilliard, R., English, J., & Coleman, M. (2022). Pro-socially motivated knowledge hiding in innovation teams. Technovation, 116, 102513. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102513
Jurčić, M., Lovrenčić, S., & Kurnoga, N. (2020). Croatian Defense Industry Competitiveness Cluster: Knowledge Management and Innovation Perspective. Business Systems Research Journal, 11(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2020-0005
Kahlke, Renate. (2018). Reflection/Commentary on a Past Article: “Generic Qualitative Approaches: Pitfalls and Benefits of Methodological Mixology”: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/160940691401300119. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1609406918788193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918788193
Levallet, N., & Chan, Y. E. (2018). Organizational knowledge retention and knowledge loss. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(1), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2017-0358
Levy, M. (2011). Knowledge retention: minimizing organizational business loss. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(4), 582–600. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271111151974
Massingham, P. R. (2018). Measuring the impact of knowledge loss: a longitudinal study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(4), 721–758. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2016-0338
Matthews, R., Maharani, C., Jupriyanto, & Wu, S. S. (2025). Indonesia’s defense acquisition strategy. Asian Security, 21(2), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2025.2527088
Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a Qualitative Document Analysis. Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044
Nowell, Lorelli S, Norris, Jill M, White, Deborah E, & Moules, Nancy J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Obeidat, B. Y., Al-Suradi, M. M., Masa’deh, R., & Tarhini, A. (2016). The impact of knowledge management on innovation: An empirical study on Jordanian consultancy firms. Management Research Review, 39(10), 1214–1238. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0214
Papa, A., Santoro, G., Tirabeni, L., & Monge, F. (2018). Social media as tool for facilitating knowledge creation and innovation in small and medium enterprises. Baltic Journal of Management, 13(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-04-2017-0125
Ramos Cordeiro, E., Lermen, F. H., Mello, C. M., Ferraris, A., & Valaskova, K. (2023). Knowledge management in small and medium enterprises: a systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and research agenda. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(2), 590–612. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2022-0800
Ranasinghe, T., Grosse, E. H., Glock, C. H., & Jaber, M. Y. (2024). Never too late to learn: Unlocking the potential of aging workforce in manufacturing and service industries. International Journal of Production Economics, 270, 109193. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109193
Ridder, H.-G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research, 10(2), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-017-0045-z
Slutskaya, Natasha, Game, Annilee M, & Simpson, Ruth C. (2018). Better Together: Examining the Role of Collaborative Ethnographic Documentary in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, 21(2), 341–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116676343
Sumbal, M. S., Tsui, E., See-to, E., & Barendrecht, A. (2017). Knowledge retention and aging workforce in the oil and gas industry: a multi perspective study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(4), 907–924. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2016-0281
Summerscales, J. (2024). Harvesting tacit knowledge for composites workforce development. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 185, 108357. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2024.108357
Usai, A., Fiano, F., Messeni Petruzzelli, A., Paoloni, P., Farina Briamonte, M., & Orlando, B. (2021). Unveiling the impact of the adoption of digital technologies on firms’ innovation performance. Journal of Business Research, 133, 327–336. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.035
Copyright (c) 2026 Sriyanto, Aris Sardjito, Sri Murtiana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
_(3).png)
