Posted by Yogesh Malhotra on July 17, 1997 at 13:20:26:

In Reply to: Re: A Strategic Framework of Organizational Knowledge Management Systems posted by Michael Taylor on July 16, 1997 at 13:15:19:

You have mentioned some very interesting issues. However, I would like to distinguish between knowledge and information. Given this contrast - in accordance with Churchman's distinction - one may argue that there are people who are afraid to share their information / data. Similarly, there are people who are information hoarders, information sharers, and information creators. However, some of these people could be knowledge creation facilitators. The link between information and knowledge is YOU, the human reader/respondent/listener/actor on the other end of the network (within the context of our dialog for knowledge creation). You are motivated to explore the information and it's you who creates the knowledge from the pixels that you see on your screen. This is the personal constructive aspect of knowledge creation.

For different readers, this information may contain different knowledge... If you are a marketeer, you may look at it from a marketeer's perspective... If you are an HR professional, you may look at it from an HR perspective... If you are an Information Technology professional, you may look at it from an IT perspective.... or you may look at it from many such perspectives. However, most importantly, it's YOUR perspective... your 'lens' that is trying to scan this information and make 'personal' sense of it... with the anticipation of future real or vicarious action(s). This is the process of knowledge creation that links your processing of information to your future action.

This seems very much consistent with what Churchman (1971, p. 10) says:

"To conceive of knowledge as a collection of information seems to rob the concept of all of its life... Knowledge resides in the user and not in the collection. It is how the user reacts to a collection of information that matters."

In the same process, when I read your message, I am trying to map the concepts and their relationships mentioned by you upon my cognitive landscape and I translate information into knowledge.

By such an ongoing process of 'social interaction,' we tend to develop the capability of personal as well as shared perspectives that provide us tentative routines or procedures - speaking at an operational level - for future action. This is the social constructive aspect of knowledge creation.

This also ties in with what Karl Sveiby talks about in his latest book:

"The minute we express ourselves in words, on paper, at a Web site, or wherever, the knowledge leaves us and the text becomes meaningless in itself. It may sound strange to someone with another mind system, but it's the reader who constructs the meaning. If you and I do not share the same context - we are from different cultures or very far from each other's point of view -- your knowledge will never be my knowledge. So information is a very poor vehicle for carrying knowledge. Managers right now are losing billions of dollars in ventures while they are trying to base business decisions on the simple misconception about what knowledge is, compared to information."

Given this perspective, knowledge creation, as a process, is more interesting and more meaningful than the conception of knowledge as information (a static meaningless state of knowledge expressed in some kind of symbols) - at least from an organizational change management and strategic view.

Given the dynamic, constructive aspect of knowledge creation, one may continue to learn, and re- learn from the same store of information, by bringing newer information, assumptions, and beliefs to interact with it or by using different lenses to see the same information.

Hence, knowledge sharing can only occur - if the receiver is actively constructing knowledge from the information sent by the sender and the sender is attempting to translate his or her tacit assumptions and beliefs - within a shared context - into explicit form (information) that is understandable by the receiver.

You have mentioned a very key point: that people are afraid to share their knowledge. "Scared in the sense that if they only know something then they will retain their job security."

For such people, I have only one message (I can't recollect the origin, however it seems to be related to philosophy adhered by companies on the cutting edge of innovation, such as Intel): "Obsolete yourself, before others obsolete you." In other words, if it is not an evolving, growing, process of learning and re-learning that examines again and again 'what you know' with what is 'out there,' you may be in real trouble... before you realize 'what you know' is out of sync with 'what is needed out there'.

Hence the importance of ongoing learning, re-learning, and knowledge creation:

"In Time of Profound Change, the Learners Inherit the Earth, While the Learned Find Themselves Beautifully Equipped to Deal with a World That No Longer Exists." -- Al Rogers

Don't get caught by the 'buggy whip' syndrome!!

Sincerely,

Yogesh Malhotra

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: On Information, Knowledge and 'Buggy Whip' Syndrome James Delavan 22:01:51 12/16/97 (1)
  • Re: On Information, Knowledge and 'Buggy Whip' Syndrome Sergio Duran 21:24:02 6/24/98 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: