Eyal Levy, 27-Oct-09 @ 23:11PM

This should be a shared creation map

Jose, could you translate it to english ?

I was thinking this map should be constructed by allowing open shared editing of a knowledge tree, like in UBpedia , a new online knowledge sharing community:

http://www.ubpedia.com

See this site, they allow each member to create his/her own part in their knowledge tree.

Could this be what you mean ?

I believe a map of all human knowledge should be dynamic and able to change.

GodBless !

Joao de Valentin de Valentin, 20-Jan-06 @ 12:31PM

KM human maping

You can see in my site www.hexagrama.com.br article 7 IC&KM what I thing about Human Knowledege.
I agree that the question is too large.

J. Palma, 16-Jan-06 @ 17:46PM

A goodwilling (?) guide for mapping knowledge

Of course that development of IT is impacting on knowledge, yet I think in a different way, meaning that knowledge is no way an emergent question...IT can enable it well, it is a good channel for...yet never a cause of.

System distributions, databases, and so on can influence or help yet -IMO- we should not confuse the what with the how or by wich means.

A direct demonstration is that many years before -when IT were not so popular yet clustered to universities, big economic entities or army- already were academic people (as much I can refer) working on application and knowledge theory.

Although a Concept could be a more(?) abstract and wider(?) category than some specific knowledge -if we consider the last as a concret practical and tested solution for a given task - we can pay attention to the work done in:

http://cmap.ihmc.us/

As a field of reference they are not a major parent for herein discussion, yet with goodwill and creativity somebody could relate both.

Who knows it?

Denham Grey, 14-Jan-06 @ 15:48PM

Mapping knowledge??

The interesting aspects of knowledge are emergent, connected and distributed. This makes mapping very difficult. May I suggest a del.icio.us tag cloud or a multi-level concept map may be alternative ways to portray this theme?

Knowledge tends to cut across formal disciplinary boundaries, emerges with new distinctions, is locality / community and context dependent. What is knowledge to some may be useless to others, key knowledge at a point in time may change as time moves along.

IMO any 'knowledge mapping' needs to be bounded - otherwise you run a very real risk of imposing a particular worldview.

J. Palma, 14-Jan-06 @ 10:01AM

It is a good idea!

I guess you talk about a Global Knowledge map, because on low levels it exists, or it is relative easy to do it.

If you focus knowledge correctly as the Know How component derived from information and experiences.

Search for a practical result -economical or with a very high significance for some body -from entrepreneur to a country or group of them-, and this map will represent a sound advance.

Knowledge management should be always alined with some plan or directive, otherwise it will lose meaning or interest without Return On Investment (ROI); focusing to enterprise activity.

This map, perhaps is the most authentic and infinite source of capital because it is the real key for practical learning of tested solutions.

It is the only source of competitive advantage, parafrasing Mikel Porter from Harvard University.

A very different question is how to organize it, managing, exploiting, keeping integrity, and so on.

Yet probably the most difficult will be the question of implicit knowledge that is almost impossible to be represented ...-yet can be teached and learned!.

Question on intangible knowledge will demand some global normatives or acepted concepts to be evaluated from economic point of view, but this question is not a reason to stop the mapping.

At the present time this concept has practical expression, yet it is controled by burocracy so it is clustered and has low functionality.

Never confuse knowledge with information and it proper derivatives, and you will understand better what do you want or can do.

Thi smapping is a way to capture value. Yet this is very difficult to explain...people want to see rapid results or to see the hardware and machines they payed for no matter it solves something that impact the results or not.

I was consulting a multinational on IT solutions 4 years ago, and after organization and structural analisys discovered that they needed a Knowledge Management Solution, yet they were deploying SAP.

After SAP they never understood that they lose millions of dollars each year, they but buy new units in several countries each year and runs ahead all the time.

I think this giant will fault down because the real value inside it is knowledge that somehow is difusing no recognised, not capture and traspassed very well.

Yet it is shareholder money.

Be as clear as possible and do not talk to clients on up to the moment you can do a killer demonstration.

Jorge C. Palma

Martin Röll, 13-Jan-06 @ 12:46PM

I think...

I think that I do not understand. What are you trying to do? What are you trying to show? I see a very simple hierarchical ordering of some words that may stand for scientific disciplines. Nothing more.