In following this thread I have become struck by the way in which much of
the disagreement appears to arise from the different ways in which
contributors understand the words 'knowledge' and 'information'. This
confusion is merely a reflection of the confusion that exists in the
literature at large.
I would like to propose the following as a basis for common understanding
of the terminology:
DATA is fragmented statments about the world. 'This is a spanner' is data.
So is 'This is a nut'.
INFORMATION is data in context. 'The spanner is used to manipulate the
nut' is information.
KNOWLEDGE is created through the application of information to the
solution of problems and the achievement of goals. 'We use the spanner to
tighten the nuts so that the machine does not break down' is knowledge.
WISDOM is the understanding of the underlying purposes of the goals we
set. 'If we don't maintain the machine and keep it from breaking down the
company will suffer and we all might lose our jobs' is wisdom. Wisdom has
a lot to do with motivation.
If these definitions are valid, then much of what is described as
'knowledge management' is actually 'information management', and therefore
a technical task. This seems to me to be the core problem. Most exercises
in 'knowledge management' seem to assume that if we store information and
make it accessible according to certain technical formulae, then we have
managed knowledge and the organisation has miraculously been transformed
into a 'knowledge organisation'.
Not so. If my definitions are valid, then 'knowledge management' is a
socio-technical process - the challenge is to establish an environment in
which the transformation of information into knowledge is nurtured.
This involves understanding FIRST the nature of cognition and the
individual and social processes through which cognition occurs. This
includes understanding the organistional and societal cultural contexts in
which the target groups are working (as a person who works in Australasia,
Europe and North America I am constantly being reminded that
socio-technical processes that work OK in one place don't work in another
- a fact that has not yet dawned on most multinationals to their very high
cost).
Then what must be understood SECOND is the goals of the activity towards
which the knowledge management is being undertaken, and these should be
commonly understood and subscribed to by all involved. They never are, of
course. Next to failing to understand cultural difference, failure to
understand and deal with the fact that multiple and often mutually
exclusive motivation is the covert reality in any work group is the most
common manifestation of mechanistic information management being mistaken
for knowledge management.
Once the foregoing are clear THIRD comes the emergent understanding of
what is required in order to manage the organisation such that the best
possible mulch is created for the social construction of knowledge from
information.
Then, finally, FOURTH it becomes possible to intelligently decide what
information, how stored, how accessed and by who is required in order to
sustain the richness of the mulch. In other words- how to design the
information management tool to support the knowledge management process.
I would contend that knowledge management is not just a fad (I am not a
knowledge management consultant so I am not just rationalising ) but a
natural consequence of increasing complexity and change. The trouble is
that much of the operationalisation of knowledge management is still
driven by people who operate with a low complexity, low change mental
model. It's the same old story of the life cycle of a fad - important and
useful concept produces disappointing results because of lousy execution
and thereby becomes discredited.
arohanui
Phillip Capper
Centre for Research on Work, Education and Business (WEB Research)
PO Box 2855
Wellington
New Zealand
Ph: (64) 04 499 8140
Fx: (64) 04 499 8439
--"Phillip Capper" <pcapper@actrix.gen.nz>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>