 |
 |
If the definition of Knowledge is related directly to information (as often seems to be the case, and was by BSI) then it makes nonsense of the distinction between Knowledge and Information. Knowledge is clearly something that is in people's heads. Most would agree that it therefore cannot be managed. Information is something that can be recorded and/or transmitted. Knowledge can't. At best, Knowledge is converted into Information and then someone else forms their own Knowledge from that Information. Most definitions of Knowledge Management essentially mean the same thing as Information Management. Some add some Human component. IT has been the biggest user of the KM term and they frequently promote their software or hardware as the solution to KM, which is palpably nonsense. Computers really only deal with Data, not even Information, let alone Knowledge! If KM can mean anything (and I'm not convinced it can as it is a tautology) then it must be short-hand for a whole slew of components that just help organisations work better - an umbrella term for things that were already happening. Whilst I dispute a literal interpretation of the term "Knowledge Management", I do see some value in some of what is being done under that heading and think that it may have some benefit, however I'm generally wary of it as it means too many things and often means nothing. It's too often some supposedly fix-all solution that some "management guru" wants to use to ride the latest bandwagon. Some of you may be interested in the following article, with which I don't completely agree, but it got me thinking about these issues: http://informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html Grahame Gould Records Manager Shire of Wyndham East Kimberley 115 Coolibah Drive PO Box 614 Kununurra 6743 [log in to unmask] 08 9168 1677 www.thelastfrontier.com.au This email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact me. The views expressed in this email may or may not be the official position of SWEK. Airnorth flies to Kununurra - contact QANTAS or your travel agent for details -----Original Message----- From: Martin Green [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Monday, 15 September 2003 15:14 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: BSI - are they right? Hi Bob, the BSI seems definition seems to me to be (a) too simplistic (b) written by someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. KM can mean many different things to different people and I dispute that 'Knowledge' can be managed. There are those who say that knowledge (as opposed to information) is in people's heads and that we need to put our efforts into the capture and re-use of this knowledge. Ok, but what's in people's heads may be of little value? I think the basis of any KM strategy has to be first get your RM processes in place and working. More importantly, get people using them so that we can learn from mistakes - 'course working in central government I don't have expect that to be the case but hold out some hope for government will change when the Freedom of Information Act allows people to see the basis for decision making ands what evidence (!?) is used. I thought BSI were better than that and heard they were working on a KM standard? Martin -----Original Message----- From: Bob McLean [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 12 September 2003 17:14 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: BSI - are they right? "Put another record on" BSI magazine 'Business Standards' (issue August/September 2003, p23) has their senior marketing manager, Ian Brewer, defining the difference between RM and KM as follows: "KM is more about information as an asset whereas RM is about creating a process by which you can store and retrieve information. For example, RM is simply about saying "all of our records on a specific topic are here". He adds that "a records management policy can add to an overall KM strategy". Is he right? Has he missed something? I would be very interested in your views on this BSI stance. However, please post your replies to the LIST via the web, rather than sending all your replies to me personally. That way we get a thread that we can all see! Bob McLean PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET. On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. GSI users see http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdf for further details. In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information on a proactive email security service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________