Posted by Barry on September 28, 2002 at 13:22:35:

In Reply to: Re: definition of knowledge with respect to the KM posted by Reilly Atkinson on September 27, 2002 at 14:58:59:

Reilly, thanks.

A definition for knowledge is important because most cultures have fixed ways of thinking.
When Knowledge Management enters in, it is likely that the culture will assume that by "knowledge" one must mean some mysterious thing or assume that there must be some deeper technical meaning, or else may assume that data is knowledge, and so attempt to bury themselves in more and more data, and glorify technical gurus who can quote formulas galore and pride themselves on being data mines.

"Information in context + Understanding" does have shortcomings which you rightly pointed out, but it has some benefits.
1. The word "understanding" makes the point that a living element must be present, since only life can understand. Thus it lays to rest old assumptions in a culture that a human culture can be managed with the same technology that is used to write computer code. That in itself is a big win in creating a more functional culture.

2. It is concise, and so simple enough for an average culture to grasp without opening up non-aligned discussions that would obscure it's practical value.

3. It makes the point of "in context" which seperates the definion of data from information.

4. We may not know what understanding is, but we do know what it's qualities are. There are several tests for whether something is understood (a quiz for instance, or a challenge to do something with the information)
A person who claims to understanding something can be expected to possess the qualities of one who understands.

5. It adds "+ understanding" to "information" which seperates the definition of "knowledge" from that of "information."

---

Follow Ups:

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: