Posted by Martyn R Jones on September 08, 1998 at 15:04:25:

In Reply to: Re: The Science and Art of Knowledge Management posted by Su on September 08, 1998 at 06:25:58:

Hello,

It's interesting to note that the more art and science change the more it remains fundamentally the same.

What I see as one of the fundamental differences between art and knowledge management may lie in "usefulness", the less useful the KM the more akin to art it is. The more liberal, subversive and shocking the theories of KM then the more it approaches the realms of art. Whilst this might not please my customers and might not help me to achieve anything tangible there is a certain charm in doing interesting things for the sake of doing them - a la "art for arts sake".

However, the problem of "contemporary art" and KM is that KM is primarily used to deliver business benefit i.e. benefit the stakeholders, this is driving a less interesting but more pragmatic approach to KM and the problem of misused, underused and perishable intellectual assets.

It certainly seems to be true that KM crosses the virtual or false boundaries of multiple disciplines, what we need to be sure of is that KM doesn't become victim of too much emphasis on the aesthetic over the pragmatic and the long term over the mid-term. KM has to be seen to be delivering something now - and there are many examples of where this is happening.

Best regards,

Martyn R Jones

@ibm.net

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: The Science and Art of Knowledge Management Robert Benjamin 01:59:07 9/13/98 (1)
  • Re: The Science and Art of Knowledge Management Su 10:31:23 9/14/98 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: