Posted by Rupert Whitehead on March 31, 1998 at 11:01:20:

In Reply to: Re: attitudes to providing KM services posted by Jay Reay on March 26, 1998 at 22:15:39:

Thankyou both Jay and Denham, for answering my questions and adding feedback. I agree with you both about the dangers of objectifying/reifying processes. Have we now found a new challenge, which is to find the middle way? The middle way is a way of building the appropriate processes that incorporates the advantages of what I called hand waving, while retaining its feet on the ground by relating back to hard deliverables.

The form of the approach revolves around a sound knowledge management strategy applied to itself. It requires the capture of the appropriate processes in a broadly reusable form. These processes are then merged to give one solution to the problem at hand. This one approach is the best under the circumstances, but it is far from dogma. It then becomes a starting point for consideration when facing similar challenges in the future, and is complimented by the existence of other approaches which challenge it. [I’m guessing this is the ‘Hegelian’ approach]. There is not a rigid right or wrong about it, it’s about pulling in the most useful aspects from each. The truth is pragmatic, not predefined.

The criticism of accountants/IT people suggests that implicit in their paradigm is that truth is predefined and there is a right or wrong answer. By involving myself in discussions like this, and building an effective working process, I hope to prove that there’s at least one exception to the general rule! The unfortunate implication of all this is that you can’t just throw somebody through a quick knowledge management course that will teach them all the right practices. Like any skill, it is something that comes with long term practice until the know how is developed. The fact that it is not prescriptive makes communication more of a problem and adds the extra level of challenge. Aware of this and drawing from your experience, it now begs the question, what is the most effective way of developing this know how? There’s reading, discussion forums, and actually doing it, (which spring to mind), but is there no reply which is slightly less glib? Are there no cunning short cuts you can reccomend to help cut down on some aimless searching/drifting/confusion. Back onto the subject of reading, if you were to advise two desert island knowledge management books, that most closely represent your view of the subject, what would they be? I am deliberately restricting you to only two approaches as this forces only the most seminal ideas to come out rather than being swamped by several recommendations which I’m sure were all good, as occurs in the other part of the news group. Could you also explain a little further about Senge et al?

I’m off to a knowledge management conference on Friday so I’ll give you an update on my ideas afterwards. Until then the enormity of what is involved in becoming a proficient knowledge manager is beginning to dawn on me. Thankyou for your continued patience, and the excellant standard of discussion,

with fond regards,

Rupert

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: desert island bookshelf Jay Reay 07:24:18 4/01/98 (1)
  • Re: desert island bookshelf Rupert Whitehead 11:03:59 4/17/98 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: