When knowledge transfer stagnates: The cost of knowledge silos and inertia

How knowledge flow fuels innovation — and what happens when it stops.

Organizations learn through dialogue and knowledge sharing.  Those discussions and sharing extend beyond the team and into other operational areas developing a new schema or abstract thought cloud of knowledge each time new information is shared and accepted as important or meaningful. 

In the lack of knowledge sharing, that thought cloud of knowledge, either stagnates or fractures with each operational unit developing its own thought cloud.  In the former, no new information enters the organization.  The culture runs on the idea that, “this is how its always been done,” so why change.  The latter grows into multiple thought clouds with varying, sometimes even, conflicting sources of knowledge.  Regardless of which occurs, there is no organizational learning as a collective. 

Here’s a great example of an organization that has no interest or ability to learn.  A friend works for a large industrial, high-speed manufacturing company.  In addition to its large physical footprint, it has been in business for about one-hundred years.  The knowledge is held by one or two managers who have been part of the organization for more than 25 years.  They limit who, how, and even when information is conveyed; they have their own proprietary way of organizing information; and do not allow for any new insights to be presented at meetings.  A perfect example is the customized template that cannot or rather will not be shared with any other team member. 

These of course are the individuals that you never want to see leave the organization because of the amount of knowledge they have, which is the exact problem.  When you have a few members of the organization who are the gatekeepers of the knowledge, this puts the organization at a real disadvantage for a variety of reasons: a) they hold all the knowledge.  Loosing them would mean losing significant amounts of institutional knowledge;  b) it leaves them with a great deal of control and negative leverage – a little like organizational blackmail; c) if and when they do leave the knowledge gap can be profound and devastating; d) it creates quite a bit of operational silos, thus limiting information that is shared and/or creates operational dis-harmony. 

Here is what knowledge-hoarding sounds like:

• We’ve always done it that way

• That will take too long to implement

• We don’t have the resources to make that change

This is perhaps the most classic response, signaling resistance to change and a reluctance to share or consider new knowledge or methods.

• That won’t work here

Dismissing new ideas without discussion, often based on past experience rather than current evidence.

• There’s no need to change what isn’t broken

Implying that existing knowledge and processes are sufficient, discouraging exploration or innovation.

• “You’ll figure it out eventually.” - a real deal buster for new hires!

Withholding guidance or best practices from newer employees, forcing them to learn through trial and error rather than shared experience.

• “I have my own way of doing things.”

Keeping personal methods or resources private, even if they could benefit the team.

• “That information isn’t really relevant to your role.”

Gatekeeping knowledge by deciding who “needs to know,” which can create silos and hinder collaboration.

• Not documenting processes or best practices.

Critical knowledge remains in the heads of a few, making it inaccessible to others and difficult to transfer when someone leaves.

• Avoiding cross-departmental collaboration.

• Experienced employees may stick to their own teams, rarely sharing insights or resources with others.

What does it look like?

• A senior salesperson has developed a highly effective pitch deck but keeps it to themselves, so new team members struggle to replicate their success.

• A long-tenured project manager is the only one who knows how to navigate certain vendor relationships, and when they’re absent, the team is left in the dark.

• When a new process improvement is suggested, a veteran employee quickly shuts it down with, “We tried that years ago, and it didn’t work,” without providing context or allowing for discussion.

Beyond the stress created around the worry of having vast amounts of knowledge walk out of the door, there are larger organizational impacts. These behaviors not only stifle innovation and learning but can also lead to frustration, decreased morale, and even higher turnover among newer or less experienced team members. Over time, this entrenched knowledge hoarding will erode trust and collaboration across the organization.

Do any of these look or sound familiar?  If so, and you’re concerned about organizational knowledge stagnation, take our quick assessment.  If you score lower than 23, consider reaching out to see how we can help!

Click Me