Posted by Lauri Grohn on July 12, 1999 at 11:22:30:

In Reply to: Knowledge Accounting System posted by Martyn R Jones on July 12, 1999 at 10:35:11:

>So, my understanding ou your posting is that KM
>is not a science because it doesn't have an
>Accounting System.

I didn't say that. Please look at all my
reasons (until now) and try to prove or
disprove them one by one:

1) Knowledge management is not science. It
is a technology, based on planning disciplines,
changing the behaviour of its objects (people).

2a)I guess we can accept that KM is not ONLY technology
and I guess we can accept that in order to do KM
effectively also people must change their working
habits.

2b)Then there will be a second round having now
different kind of people applying KM.

2c) If there will be a convergence on this KM might become
a science...

3) We still don't have any working knowledge accounting
system...

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Why KM is not a science (yet?) Kees de Vos 06:09:57 7/14/99 (3)
  • Re: Why KM is not a science (yet?) Lauri Grohn 08:19:51 7/14/99 (2)
    • Re: Why KM is not a science (yet?) Dan Cohen 17:20:23 7/14/99 (1)
      • Accounting or just statistics? Lauri Grohn 03:00:13 7/15/99 (0)
• Reasons, Arguments, Shorthand and Anecdotes Martyn R Jones 13:54:48 7/12/99 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: