Summary: Denham Grey has pointed out that knowledge is situated and complex. I elaborate, just a bit, on the 'situating' part

The situating is with reference to situations such as those which through persistent disequilibrium provoke further learning. I would also suggest that there are a great variety of provocateurs whomay be animate or inanimate, who may be here [physically present] , or imagined or remembered.

Knowledge is complex. It's important to remind ourselves that the knower is rather complex too.

Mapping knowledge. Using a questionnaire has proved, in my experience, to be the least effective way to map and understand knowledge gaps, surface issues , to identify worthwhile new practices or opportunities Why? Knowledge is a complex subject, most people confuse information & knowledge and need exposure & training to understand and appreciate the distinction.

A questionnaire will return what the respondent want you to 'see' rather than their assumptions, true experiences, actual issues and deep desires

There are always problems with 'your' interpretation and scoring no matter how carefully the survey wording is crafted and how mant times it is tested

To appreciate knowledge gaps, you need to understand the personal networks and work context - This is impossible to get via a survey - it requires immersion

Answers are clouded by personal and group assumptions / worldviews which are mostly tacit and unarticulated Surveys tend to overstimate the problem and the returns are very difficult to aggregate for the reasons given [ Knowledge-at-work]

Each group creates its own world of understanding, its own unique map of the universe where knowledge 'items' with the same name, e.g., productive work, collaboration, has its own denotative and connotative field and effects on attitude, willingness to learn or willingness to obstruct, etc.

[Update[9/22]: To bring the entry back to the situated-ness of knowledge, knowledge is is said to exist when there is an equilibrium between an individual and a 'situation', which is, [particulary if you take account of the degree to which knowledge is constructed with relational history, memories , family values, etc. as frames and motivators for learning] almost invariably social.

The situatedness of knowledge is what makes the connotation of a given knowledge item distinct for each individual and group. These connotative aspects are dynamically potent and yet not generally demonstrated in the results of surveys. Thus the need for immersion as a means of surfacing the web of connative forces which help drive any particular group or organization. ]