Up-to-date knowledge artefacts positively affect people and operations (concept pilot interviews, interviews, questionnaires). Alongside making the delivery of operations easier (interviews), 9.51% of operations with updated knowledge artefacts relate to 15% increase in performance (questionnaires). In the Externalization mode, the enablers of updating knowledge, are dialogue and articulation skills. Dia-logue relates to learning from, and allowing, a plurality of viewpoints, in addition to having inter-personal, good listening skills (as individuals and as organisations). Artic-ulation skills enable people to express the experience in a way that can be captured panoramically and to then be understood (literature). As the media for recording knowledge evolve fast, continually-developing articulation skills and infra-structure are needed. The updating enablers need to be considered from the user and the provider perspectives. Both perspectives have three aspects in common. Firstly, the lack of capacity and financial resources, which make updating knowledge a much lower priority, and result in loss of tacit knowledge that is not being codified in knowledge artefacts (concept pilot interviews, interviews). Secondly, that articulation of intangible operations (Cultural education, Social participation) is more demanding than the articulation of tangible operational knowledge (Economic development, Environmental preservation) and accordingly the conversion rate of present to updated knowledge artefacts is higher in the tangible operations (questionnaires, interviews). Thirdly, regulatory intervention, such as accreditation, legal and funding requirements, national policy, and heritage listing or wider planning legislation, all trigger regular up-dating (by users and providers) on affected operations (questionnaires, interviews).

Additionally, updating by user organisations depends on the size of operations and teams, habitat specialism, and organisational culture (questionnaires). Alongside limited capacity, there is an absence of habitually recording processes as they hap-pen. The dialogue about sharing experiences and learning, needs to be led by the organisation, and to take place in a culture of trust. As many staff and most volunteers have limited access to the organisation’s recorded knowledge (questionnaires), mutual trust is generally not demonstrated, limiting the motivation to share new experiences. Furthermore, availability of technology and skills to use technology, is a significant consideration; the transition from pen and paper, to cameras and software-based notebooks and process-capturing programmes, might be theoretically feasible but is not suitable for all conditions (for example visitor facing operations, remote locations, or by volunteers with no access or training to it) (questionnaires, interviews).

Provider organisations are hindered in updating knowledge artefacts by the short life of the project funding for creating such resources, and the limited levels or absence of horizon scanning and feedback about the knowledge resources (question-naires, interviews). Because of the ecosystem fragmentation, any available feedback is not magnified, and planning is reactive. Often, knowledge resources are created after changes to legislation or regulations, not before. This, for example, makes it dif-ficult for staff who provide guidance or training to know who is developing what, and whether and when the knowledge resources will be updated (interviews). The ecosys-tem is reactive, not proactive. A dialogue therefore is even more necessary between the provider organisations. Additionally, provider articulation skills and infrastructure have impact at large, ecosystem scale. Provider organisations need to become profi-cient in all the new codifying technology, and to have access to it. They need train-the-trainer knowledge resources and technological infrastructure. Their knowledge and their knowledge resources need to be up-to-date consistently, so they can pass on that knowledge and suitable advice to the user organisations. The policy and fund-ing behind it, have focused to digitally upskill the user organisations, but instead fund-ing (the same pot of money) needs to be focusing more on training-the-trainers, and to enable a large-scale knowledge-articulating technological infrastructure that benefits the whole ecosystem.