Special Discussion Challenge
One of the best ways to learn and leverage knowledge is by sharing thoughts
and experiences with others. We invite you to add your comments on the
issue raised by Denham Grey, Chief Executive Officer, GreyMatter Inc.,
one of our contributors to issue 2. He wonders: "if others also
see the need to archive, as an attribute that separates knowledge from
information?"
Read Grey's Letter and our editorial comments below: Then join the debate: What is KM versus IM? What activities and what attributes separate the two?
Denham Grey, Chief Executive Officer, GreyMatter Inc.:
Please note: To read Michael J.D. Sutton's article, you must be a subscriber, although anyone may join the debate.
|
Reading Michael J.D. Sutton's article in Vol 1 (2)
[Archive Knowledge
Environments], I was struck by a contrast I wish to
share. Archival functions are important for information and
Michael makes a strong case why we should be paying attention
to this. However, I question their value for knowledge repositories,
which seem to be closer to the action. I feel the key functionality
for knowledge work is facile annotation, instant notification
and multiple feedback channels.
Knowledge has an ever decreasing half-life, what we need is fast access to current stuff, working links to the people associated with the content, and a way to determine validity of the of the presented information and heuristics.
Having a central exchange standard, so we can easily and quickly move information between separate applications is key. Glad to see Michael highlight the new standard for topic mapping, as this seems to be an area of increasing attention and focus
Wondering if others also see the need to archive, as a attribute that separates knowledge from information?
Denham Grey
Chief Executive Officer, GreyMatter Inc
The divergent views of what is knowledge management, therefore, what are truly KM activities, has long been an important issue among those interested in KM. We encourage you to send your views on this topic and we will add them to this special discussion page. Looking forward to a lively and elucidating debate.
Editor-in-Chief,
KnowMap.
|
|
I am writing to contribute to the conversation begun by Michael
Sutton, to which Denham has responded --
Denham is perhaps proposing an either/or when a both/and perspective
is required. Archived "knowledge" is rarely as significant
as new "knowledge" derived from people engaged with
diverse knowledge objects, artifacts, and their own unique points
of view, experience etc.
However, the role of the past as prelude to the future should
not be ignored nor underestimated. How often, when you are writing,
preparing a speech, developing a web page etc., have you wished
for instant access to THE RIGHT quote, perspective, point-of-view
that someone else has expressed??
Archives are necessary, even if not sufficient. Arm me with
great searchable archives, and I can innovate like crazy!
Thanks for your attention,
Barbara Smith Weaver Smith,
president of Smith Weaver Smith, Inc.
|
|
Dear editor,
Although I basically agree with Denham Grey's suggestion that
the archiving process "separates knowledge from information",
I would rather say that archiving: "illustrates the reciprocal
relationship between knowledge and information".
To me, the concept knowledge is relevant only in the context
of action, while information is externalized, de-activated knowledge.
This is an entirely natural and necessary relationship unless
we hope to retain all our knowledge online in our brains! So rather
than a process of separating, I see archiving merely as a process
of preserving for later use. As Barbara Weaver-Smith says, it's
not an either/or situation - it's both.
One might draw an analogy here with computer software. We
need both the stored (archived) application saved on our hard
disk, and the running application in the computer memory.
The de-activated program on disk is of no use until it is activated
by loading into RAM. And it is more convenient, isn't it; to be
able to activate that dormant program when we require it, rather
than trying to keep it loaded all the time? And if we still remain
to be convinced of the role and value of archiving, then we need
look no further than the Library of Congress or the British Library,
and to consider whether, without someone, somewhere indulging
in a little archiving, we would have the works of Shakespeare
today?
One other related point has come to mind. My membership of
a number of list servers and discussion groups, as well as the
books on KM I have read, seem to me to reveal a certain polarity
between Europe and the USA. US sources on KM do seem to stress
the role of knowledge in innovation at the expense of its role
in effective performance, whereas in Europe, the opposite seems
to be true. As one indicator of this polarity, there seems to
be a great deal of research going on Stateside into KM systems
to provide competitive intelligence or know-how in real time,
but little research into corporate memory systems. Much of the
work on the latter seems to be based in continental Europe, particularly
in Germany. This polarity may be purely a figment of my imagination,
and no doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong. But if such
a polarity exists, does it reflect some kind of socio-cultural
difference?
Regards,
R.J. (Bob) Bater
Principal Associate
InfoPlex Associates
Bristol, UK
|
Your answers will be added below. Those who contribute to this debate
with answers that we publish will win an Emerald
subscription (3 complimentary issues) to KnowMap for
their contribution. If you are already a subscriber, 3 additional issues
will be added to your subscription term.
|
