Posted by Yogesh Malhotra on June 21, 1997 at 01:06:38:

In Reply to: Re: Knowledge: Active Process of Anticipative Construction? posted by Meckler on June 20, 1997 at 13:48:53:

Mark,

You have raised an interesting point which I had to grapple over the course of last few years. I appreciate your emphasis on ontological clarity, however, given the fuzzy state of KM, my key concern is about seeking conceptual and theoretical clarity along with some sense of realism (pragmatic clarity). We have earlier discussed why the static notion of knowledge is limited in capturing the process of dynamic interactions within and between humans and computers via communication interfaces.

Just like the constructs of 'information', and 'knowledge', the picture is murky about the specificity of the construct of 'learning.' For instance, when we refer to learning, what do we exactly imply. Do we imply critical thinking or rote learning, the contrast pointed out by Kurfiss (1988)? Do we imply the behavioral notion of learning based on the Skinnerian emphasis on the environmental events; the Thorndikean tradition of connectionism (S-R theory of learning); Hull's emphasis on drive or arousal; or Tolman's notion of learning based on expectancy? Or do we imply the Gestalt view or the variation suggested by Piaget? Or do we imply the humanist notion of learning or the social learning orientation (Bandura). There are certainly some other competing views such as those based on John Dewey, Jerome Bruner and George Kelly, however the above examples would serve the objective of illustrating the point.

However, almost all notions of learning focus on the individual level cognitive and psychological processes... this is what distinguishes the notion of 'knowledge creation' suggested by Nonaka. My conceptualization takes Nonaka's view and extends it further to account explicitly for the issues of organizational control and strategy, while retaining his emphasis on the social creation of knowledge. Furthermore, in contrast to Nonaka, my conceptualization also takes into consideration the information systems and management control systems as elements of the knowledge creation process. Hence, in this view learning is a subset of the knowledge creation processes which operate beyond the individual level and explicitly account for the [potential] for action. One may also suggest that knowledge management [if there is anything of that nature] is a superset of knowledge creation. However, given my interest in understanding the link between information processes, the individual and collective interactions based on those processes within an organizational context, and the resultant [potential for] action, the construct of knowledge creation seems proximal as a surrogate.

Regards,

Yogesh Malhotra

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: On Learning and Knowledge Creation Hans van der Perk 07:44:53 1/03/98 (1)
  • Re: On Learning and Knowledge Creation Yogesh Malhotra 02:14:10 1/06/98 (0)
• Re: On Learning and Knowledge Creation Ricardo Correia 05:38:35 11/03/97 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: