The doctoral thesis with the title “The tacit dimensions of knowledge and its implications for Knowledge Management” is a theoretic-sociologic work about knowledge and Knowledge Management. To establish an understanding of knowledge we have to state that knowledge has a broad frame of reference. Knowledge includes personal and non-personal aspects and it can’t be considered as a thing or an object. In my judgement we have to take the term tacit knowledge into consideration for a further examination of knowledge. Tacit knowledge is a term that was introduced by Michael Polanyi. From his point of view tacit knowledge is not a self-contained type of knowledge. Polanyi argues that knowledge is bi-structured. He argues for the reciprocal relation of a knowledge-background and foreground. He views knowledge as a combination of unconscious and conscious propositions. Knowing and skilful acting is neither purely intuitive nor a calculating procedure. It may be highly conscious, but it does not follow strict and formalisable rules. Furthermore it is creative. Thus Polanyi said, “a wholly explicit knowledge is unthinkable” (Polanyi, M., 1969: Knowing and Being. Chicago, p. 144). Explicit knowledge must be tacitly understood to be knowledge. That’s why Polanyi said that “we know more than we can tell” (Polanyi, M., 1966: The Tacit Dimension. London, p. 4). Following that I suggest to define knowledge as a social practice formed in interactive situations and tacitly embedded in different contexts. These considerations to the sociological study of knowledge I applied to the field of strategic management.I examined Knowledge Management from a tacit knowledge approach. Knowledge Management is hard to compare with the management of tangible goods or monetary assets. Knowledge Management has always to take into account the specific situation of an organization. If we accept the premise that Knowledge Management is concerned with the entire process of discovery and creation of knowledge then we have to state that we cannot identify a formula for only one best way to manage knowledge. Nevertheless a systematic handling of knowledge in an organization is possible. Therefore it can be referred to many ideas, tools and methods which have to be adjusted to the organizational practice. Knowledge Management is in addition to that not primarily a question of technology. The main question is how people can learn, think and work with technological equipment. That takes into consideration that Knowledge can’t be adopted or generated from the internet or a database with a mouse click. Knowledge Management has rather to be understood as a process of learning. Knowledge Management that wants to pay attention to the tacit constitution of knowledge becomes an ambivalent project. On the one hand it enables auspicious perspectives and on the other hand it requires to get involved with contingent processes. Because it’s impossible to regulate the increase, sharing and use of knowledge by some arrangements it is necessary to tolerate uncertainty. Ambitious Knowledge Management has to deal with weak causalities and must be open-minded about unforeseen events. After all the outstanding challenge of Knowledge Management is the development of an Indeterminacy Management or rather a Non-Knowledge Management.