A thirst for knowledge
Today’s business world started to focus on managing knowledge along with apparition of “artificial intelligence” and “expert systems” in 1970’s supposed to replace decision making process. However, we try to manage knowledge since the very beginning of mankind. Sophistication of knowledge carriers is changing within technological advancement, but the main goal remains unchanged. Ranging from primitive cave drawings through chronicles to hi-tech solutions, we endeavor to preserve and develop our knowledge.
However, there are a few essential matters that need to be addressed to start with. What ‘knowledge’ actually means? What is the difference between knowledge, information and data? Is knowledge manageable?
According to T.D. Wilson knowledge is created through mental process of comprehension and learning, realized essentially in mind, involving interaction with the outside world. In other words, knowledge is ‘what we know’. While expressing our ‘knowledge’ via oral, written, graphic or gestural messages, we do not transfer knowledge, but information. Receiver assimilates information, not knowledge. Those knowledge structures of sender and receiver are different or “biographically determined”, and therefore leave place for interpretations. Data, being as information an outside mind element that can be manipulated, consists in simple facts. However, put in “context of relevance for the recipient”, those facts become information. In that light, Wilson comes to conclusion that only information and data can be managed. Knowledge can be managed only to some extend, on individual level, but imperfectly.
“I don’t believe knowledge can be managed. Knowledge Management is a poor term, but we are stuck with it, I suppose. “Knowledge Focus” or “Knowledge Creation” (Nonaka) are better terms, because they describe a mindset, which sees knowledge as activity not an object”. (Karl Erik Sveiby)
In spite of having “stucked” with the unfortunate term, I would like to emphasize the importance of Knowledge Focus nowadays. P.F. Drucker highlights that persistence of today’s companies depends a lot on their knowledge. He states that nowadays blue-collar workers represent one fifth of the workforce, whereas white-collar workers stand for two fifth. Moreover, Drucker stresses, we are “in the year 2000 roughly where we were in the year 1900” in terms of today’s comprehension of knowledge worker productivity. Understanding of company’s knowledge is therefore essential. Consequences of non-knowledge management can be several. Employees creating already existing information/data or using outdated documents, people searching for non existing documents or using documents of low quality. And all that costs money!
What can be done about it? Knowledge is not a simple set of facts that can be easily copied or transferred. It is both explicit and tacit and that tacit aspect adds complexity and makes it one of the most difficult management areas to deal with. Knowledge sharing within company requires several knowledge-enablers, inter alia strong support from its top management and inter-human communication. However, here one confronts the first challenge. In order to justify investment in knowledge and convince the top management, one needs relevant and objective measurement methods.
According to GAAP “a direct relationship between research and development costs and specific future revenue generally has not been demonstrated, even with the benefit of hindsight”. Knowledge activities, like employee training, advertising or R&D are treated as cost not as investment. A strong need of relevant objective measurement tools and methods persists and those are needed to have visibility on intangible strategic assets of the company. One can start from arranging knowledge documents ideally in a centralized way. Then comes creation of network of experts that can share best practices among employees. The toughest part is probably embedment of knowledge culture within the company environment. To start with, it is up to top management to show good examples.
Unquestionably easier to say than do!
