To know that we know what we know,
And to know that we don’t know that we do not know what we do not know,
That is true knowledge!
(Nicholas Copernicus)
For much more than too long, people and professional actors have arranged for writing reports and setting systems to accumulate and “bank” data considered as “knowledge” because of the quantity, and “knowledge management” because of the used methods and devices.
Considering these depicted practices as “truly ascertained”, its proponents come to say that KM is a software that is automating all related manual procedures and improving the subsequent operations.
Well, it is time to remember the differences in between data, information and knowledge and what’s really contributing to those critical distinctions. No more than an “information theory” in between “data” and “information”, and a “knowledge theory” in between the “information” and “knowledge”.
An unavoidable prerequisite: the collaboratively written definitions of all related elements: data, information, knowledge, and theory … a very minimum that won’t be that easy to discuss!
Collaboration is critical: that’s the only way to make any idea and / or project understandable by all participants. In fact, they are all acting in a position that will differ from the other’s!
It’s a “4D dimension” that may not be overlooked.
And that is also the reason why we are all facing countless points of views!
In some other words, that it will become understandable everywhere and at all levels when it is appropriately contextualized -a starting point all are agreeing on- as from the earliest encounter and subsequent discussion.
Let’s go further and imagine the continuity problematic.
We’ll have to maintain a continuous actualization of the various contexts and their well explicated connections.
That addition to the KM system has a lot of advantages.
In fact, experienced professionals, those -ideally hyperlinked- proposed associations have more signification than thousands of lines because they get the event circumstantiations at the same moment.
As from that time, may we say that a real KM initiative has been undertaken?
But that isn’t enough for considering the system as being “global”: it takes what has happened, what’s going on plus eventual external “feeds” from information brokers or equivalent you’re paying for keeping your activities and contributors well documented!
Hopefully, governmental and other public institutions are supposed to notify freely changes in laws and / or administrative processes.
And that is also supposed to be “brought in” to avoid errors and risks of bad synchronizations (1).
Going further means moving one or more steps ahead and working with the “knowledge of what’s supposed to arrive tomorrow” or, to say it differently, “futuring the knowledge”.
That isn’t really new. But that isn’t a current practice either!
KM is NOT “a” software and we’ll start discussing the concept of “Futuring Knowledge Management” or the fundamental intelligence return to the essence of what we need for optimizing endlessly the global society organization!
And to know that we don’t know that we do not know what we do not know,
That is true knowledge!
(Nicholas Copernicus)
For much more than too long, people and professional actors have arranged for writing reports and setting systems to accumulate and “bank” data considered as “knowledge” because of the quantity, and “knowledge management” because of the used methods and devices.
Considering these depicted practices as “truly ascertained”, its proponents come to say that KM is a software that is automating all related manual procedures and improving the subsequent operations.
Well, it is time to remember the differences in between data, information and knowledge and what’s really contributing to those critical distinctions. No more than an “information theory” in between “data” and “information”, and a “knowledge theory” in between the “information” and “knowledge”.
An unavoidable prerequisite: the collaboratively written definitions of all related elements: data, information, knowledge, and theory … a very minimum that won’t be that easy to discuss!
Collaboration is critical: that’s the only way to make any idea and / or project understandable by all participants. In fact, they are all acting in a position that will differ from the other’s!
It’s a “4D dimension” that may not be overlooked.
And that is also the reason why we are all facing countless points of views!
In some other words, that it will become understandable everywhere and at all levels when it is appropriately contextualized -a starting point all are agreeing on- as from the earliest encounter and subsequent discussion.
Let’s go further and imagine the continuity problematic.
We’ll have to maintain a continuous actualization of the various contexts and their well explicated connections.
That addition to the KM system has a lot of advantages.
In fact, experienced professionals, those -ideally hyperlinked- proposed associations have more signification than thousands of lines because they get the event circumstantiations at the same moment.
As from that time, may we say that a real KM initiative has been undertaken?
But that isn’t enough for considering the system as being “global”: it takes what has happened, what’s going on plus eventual external “feeds” from information brokers or equivalent you’re paying for keeping your activities and contributors well documented!
Hopefully, governmental and other public institutions are supposed to notify freely changes in laws and / or administrative processes.
And that is also supposed to be “brought in” to avoid errors and risks of bad synchronizations (1).
Going further means moving one or more steps ahead and working with the “knowledge of what’s supposed to arrive tomorrow” or, to say it differently, “futuring the knowledge”.
That isn’t really new. But that isn’t a current practice either!
KM is NOT “a” software and we’ll start discussing the concept of “Futuring Knowledge Management” or the fundamental intelligence return to the essence of what we need for optimizing endlessly the global society organization!
The “KM reality” has been rapidly evocated; let’s look at the “KM futurity”!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) More on our site "communication, integration, synchronization" (http://www.fbc-e.com/)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire