Posted by Vaughn P. Fox on September 21, 1999 at 21:18:01:

In Reply to: Re: Curious about Knowledge Management posted by Daan de Koning on September 20, 1999 at 11:20:52:

Daan,
Good comments. Today I was learning how to use new software. Each time I learned a new step, I gained knowledge of the capability. Each piece of knowledge gained helped me to attain an understanding as to how I could use that software to support various functions I needed to perform. At a certain point, the knowledge I gained gave me the level of understanding I felt comfortable enough to use the software. Although I did not completely understand the full potential of the software, I moved forward w/ the level of understanding I needed to work issues using the software.
If you look at the process I used to gain understanding, I first read raw data and processed that data to gain knowledge. The same process was repeatedly used until the knowledge gained combined w/ objective reasoning and judgement (based on my experience) promoted a level of understanding that I felt comfortable enough to use that capability.
If the process identified above is accurate, why are people focusing on knowledge instead of understanding? Whether they use KM or IM, is irrelevant…as long as they recognize where they need to place their priority of work/efforts to obtain desired results. I am a firm believer that identification of information requirements/needs are key to success. If you are able to recognize the processes used to support information needed to attain the level of understanding required by decisionmakers prior to making decisions, you can recognize the proper mix of people, training, equipment/software, network infrastructure, organizations, facilities, and security needed to produce information in a form that provides the knowledge needed to attain understanding linked to key decisions. If you compare those results w/ what is currently used, you can quickly recognize deficiencies and begin implementation of corrective actions in a realistic, progressive manner.
Most solutions I read about in this discussion forum address capability sets. Those capability sets will not produce desired results unless a commonly understood thought process or methodology is used to identify the proper mix of capability sets based upon command relationships, organization of the work force and the operating environment. If the supported organization is taught how to manage the initial results, they could potentially possess the capability to improve/refine processes used to support essential information requirements/needs, which will allow them to promote unity of effort and control tempo to achieve desired near term and projected results.
You are fortunate in that you acquire tools w/ instructions that explain how to use those tools. But how often have you purchased a tool that needs to interact w/ several other tools and the instructions to integrate those tools are not provided? IM and KM are attempts to manage information that often crosses functional boundaries to achieve desired results in a timely manner. Maybe I need to hear your definition of KM. Great exchange of info. Thanks.

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Curious about Knowledge Management Daan de Koning 15:42:04 9/23/99 (5)
  • Re: Curious about Knowledge Management Vaughn P. Fox 23:16:38 9/23/99 (4)
    • Re: The philosophy of KM Diwakar Thakore 12:27:36 11/18/99 (0)
    • Re: Curious about Knowledge Management Daan de Koning 08:42:06 9/24/99 (2)
      • Re: Curious about Knowledge Management Vaughn P. Fox 08:21:10 9/25/99 (1)
        • another UTK Daan de Koning 10:34:24 9/26/99 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: