Deconstructing Knowledge Management with Steve Barth: KB Special Event 24 May 2006, 15:00 CET
Total number of comments: 9 (Show More)
Page 1
Steve really hits KM where it hurts!.
Yes KM should be about sense-making, awareness, agility and knowledge creation, and yes most current KM is mainly about information organization, tools for content and measuring 'knowledge assets' - more shame on us.
I'm not sure that the quest to 'know what we know' is pointed entirely in the wrong direction - we need to reflect on errors, learn from mistakes and avoid recognised pitfalls - but Steve is right, KM has put way too little focus on new knowledge creation, has failed to be forward looking, tends to be reactive rather than being sensitive to monitoring the environment and crafting new knowledge.
Partly I think this is due to a deep failure to appreciate & make a clear distinction between the fundamental characterictics of information and knowledge and being more concerned with measuring knowledge assets & intellectual capital than charting knowledge flows or attending to impediments.
Knowledge resides in a rich ecology, we must delve into dynamics, appreciate interactions and feedback, understand emergence and foster relationships.
Clearly 'right information to right people at right time' is a mantra that has led us astray.
More:
http://denham.typepad.com/km/2006/04/deconstructing_.html
Yes KM should be about sense-making, awareness, agility and knowledge creation, and yes most current KM is mainly about information organization, tools for content and measuring 'knowledge assets' - more shame on us.
I'm not sure that the quest to 'know what we know' is pointed entirely in the wrong direction - we need to reflect on errors, learn from mistakes and avoid recognised pitfalls - but Steve is right, KM has put way too little focus on new knowledge creation, has failed to be forward looking, tends to be reactive rather than being sensitive to monitoring the environment and crafting new knowledge.
Partly I think this is due to a deep failure to appreciate & make a clear distinction between the fundamental characterictics of information and knowledge and being more concerned with measuring knowledge assets & intellectual capital than charting knowledge flows or attending to impediments.
Knowledge resides in a rich ecology, we must delve into dynamics, appreciate interactions and feedback, understand emergence and foster relationships.
Clearly 'right information to right people at right time' is a mantra that has led us astray.
More:
http://denham.typepad.com/km/2006/04/deconstructing_.html
Edited: 30-Apr-06 03:25am
I would like to inform about an event in Italy about "The future and tangible side of complexity". Many thanks
Francesco
Francesco
Attached files:(1 total)
-
Outline of the Event "The future and tanglible sides of complexity"18-May-06
Hi, looking forward to chatting with everybody on Wednesday!
Steve
Steve
Wondering where to access the transcript from this event?. Was unable to attend due to work restrictions.
Let's continue to discuss Steve's excellent critique of KM
Let's continue to discuss Steve's excellent critique of KM
Edited: 27-May-06 10:30pm
Many thanks for the transcript Ed, much appreciated.
Some questions / points that resonated for me.
>>How do we (best) contribute our expertise? - a key question.
You need a level of comfort, attention, interest, trust and need before others will listen, engage in deep dialog, question, inquire and test your experiences. There needs to be a common bond, a linga fraca, a shared context and mutual end goal. - often this is difficult to establish due to shortage of time, familiarity, past experiences, lack of exposure, little common ground......
>>...i was seeking ways to map principles, processes, values, skills, and tools for the different modes/steps/phases of knowledge work.
Patterns have proved to be a useful way to aggregate and distil experiences when working with a small group or CoP. Patterns however do not scale well and community investment in their articulation and refinement is huge - often we experience way too much churn to make this effort payback.
>>Why do we seem to spend (so much of) our time managing information instead of knowledge? - another key insight.
Information is a message (think audience, channel, end goal), knowledge is learning, awareness, testing insights. Information is tangible, codified, accessible, static, retrievable, distributable... knowledge is emergent, context dependent, ephemeral, social, pragmatic - harder to grasp, define and work with by far.
Some questions / points that resonated for me.
>>How do we (best) contribute our expertise? - a key question.
You need a level of comfort, attention, interest, trust and need before others will listen, engage in deep dialog, question, inquire and test your experiences. There needs to be a common bond, a linga fraca, a shared context and mutual end goal. - often this is difficult to establish due to shortage of time, familiarity, past experiences, lack of exposure, little common ground......
>>...i was seeking ways to map principles, processes, values, skills, and tools for the different modes/steps/phases of knowledge work.
Patterns have proved to be a useful way to aggregate and distil experiences when working with a small group or CoP. Patterns however do not scale well and community investment in their articulation and refinement is huge - often we experience way too much churn to make this effort payback.
>>Why do we seem to spend (so much of) our time managing information instead of knowledge? - another key insight.
Information is a message (think audience, channel, end goal), knowledge is learning, awareness, testing insights. Information is tangible, codified, accessible, static, retrievable, distributable... knowledge is emergent, context dependent, ephemeral, social, pragmatic - harder to grasp, define and work with by far.
Steve made this remark during the 'conversation' which I found very interesting and wish to explore further:
>>KM avoids talking about anything that matters: learning, culture, BELIEF.
There certainly is a strong school of KM thought that pushes knowledge = truth, that puts great store on testing, validation and falsification. We all gloss over sense-making, intuition & private heuristics as these are tricky, hard to spot, articulate and discuss.
I'm always surprised that the excellent work of Edwin Hutchins on distributed intelligence has received little attention in KM circles. Hutchins looked at the way knowledge is reified in artifacts, distributed across people, practices and places. His study of Navy Navigation teams (Cognition in the wild) is well worth a read.
In the end I'm thinking all knowledge is belief.
>>KM avoids talking about anything that matters: learning, culture, BELIEF.
There certainly is a strong school of KM thought that pushes knowledge = truth, that puts great store on testing, validation and falsification. We all gloss over sense-making, intuition & private heuristics as these are tricky, hard to spot, articulate and discuss.
I'm always surprised that the excellent work of Edwin Hutchins on distributed intelligence has received little attention in KM circles. Hutchins looked at the way knowledge is reified in artifacts, distributed across people, practices and places. His study of Navy Navigation teams (Cognition in the wild) is well worth a read.
In the end I'm thinking all knowledge is belief.
If you have been following the web2.0 meme, be sure to subscribe to the library2.0 tag at Del.icio.us
http://del.icio.us/tag/library2.0
These L2.0 folks are using web2.0 tools and practices to promote KM. RSS feeds help with awareness, podcasts open audio channels for content distribution, blogs allow patrons to express ideas, comment and contibute to a distributed conversation.
I'm thinking L.20 is fast becoming the new KM.
http://del.icio.us/tag/library2.0
These L2.0 folks are using web2.0 tools and practices to promote KM. RSS feeds help with awareness, podcasts open audio channels for content distribution, blogs allow patrons to express ideas, comment and contibute to a distributed conversation.
I'm thinking L.20 is fast becoming the new KM.
Page 1
Deconstructing Knowledge Management with Steve Barth: KB Special Event 24 May 2006, 15:00 CET
Ed Mitchell
26-Apr-06 4:13pm
Location: KnowledgeBoard workshop
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/events/online.html
(Once you are there, click on 'Visit the chatroom' link to enter the workshop).
KM is frequently defined as getting the right information to the right person at the right time so he or she can make the right decision. The assumption is that we make better decisions if we have access to knowledge in the forms of information and expertise—but that there is a lot of irrelevant information getting in the way. More often than not, we are drowning in both information and knowledge — but starved for meaning and actionable belief.
Typically, knowledge management attempts to improve efficiency by centralizing, codifying and standardizing the flow of information through business processes—while it attempts to improve effectiveness by more deliberately stimulating the flow of ideas between individuals and communities.
However, even “enlightened” KM specialists tend to rely on formalized systems, whether they be technology solutions or organizational practices. Although few still seek to create expert databases of disembodied wisdom, most still quest for a state of organizational knowing—to “know what we know.”
After more than a decade of concerted efforts, what’s working and what isn’t?
• Instead of accelerating learning and innovation, do overly-structured approaches to knowledge management minimize the uncertainty, diversity, autonomy and serendipity necessary for the productive evolution of ideas?
• Instead of alleviating cognitive overload, are KM tools and techniques designed to support individual and collective performance and productivity actually making the problem worse?
• With urgent needs for better “intelligence” in both corporate and government strategies, emphasis is shifting from decision-making to sense-making. Is knowledge management up to the challenge?
Steve's Biography:
Steve Barth is a recognized authority on knowledge management and organizational learning, especially the dynamic relationships between individual knowledge workers and their peers, teams, organizations and communities. An award winning business writer, in 1998 he was a founding editor of Knowledge Management magazine (now destinationKM.com) and since 2001 has written a regular column for KM World. He was the first Visiting Scholar to Harvard's Learning Innovations Lab in 2002 and editorial director for the Cynefin Centre for Organisational Complexity since 2003. Steve currently serves as an advisor to international corporate and government clients, including the Office of the Prime Minister in Thailand and Coemergence Inc. in Canada.
Attached files:(1 total)
Edited: 27-Apr-06 10:44am