When there is a lack of unified purpose, information sharing leads to chaos... and sometimes can cause more problems than it solves. To illustrate this point, I'd like to share the legend of King Ammon.
In a dialog between himself and Phaedrus, Socrates told the tale of king Ammon. He was a wise and just ruler, and all the gods admired him and his virtues.
One day, Ammon was met by the Egyptian god Thoth, who was an inventor, and the "scribe of the gods." Thoth admired Ammon, and wanted to share his inventions with Ammon and all his Egyptian subjects. Ammon was impressed with most of the inventions... except for one: writing.

Ammon was not a fan of writing... and chided Thoth for creating it:
What you have discovered is a receipt for recollection, not memory. And as for wisdom, your pupils will have the reputation for it but not the reality: they will receive a quantity of information without proper instruction, and in consequence be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant. And because they are filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom, they will be a burden to society.
Hmmm... so Ammon feared what would happen if somebody read something, didn't understand it, quoted it anyway to appear wise, but in actuality had no real wisdom... and in doing so became more powerful, perhaps even respected, so that people even followed him... but because he only appeared to be wise, he made bad decisions, and ultimately became a significant burden to his fellow men.
gee... sound like anybody you know?
Naturally, we only have this great story because of the written word... so nobody would go so far as to claim that writing is bad. However this legend does bring up a valuable point for knowledge management systems:
We should NOT focus on sharing information; we should focus on teaching knowledge.
You shouldn't just dump data to a blog and expect people to read it... you shouldn't dump half-baked documentation into a wiki and expect others to maintain it... you shouldn't just deploy an enterprise search or ECM system, then allow it to become a dumping ground for "data."
What we need are systems that teach; not systems that share. Because without that context, without teaching, and without experience, sharing information could very likely lead to problems...
...and it might actually make you a burden to your fellow men.
Comments
Your point is interesting -
Your point is interesting - but isn't all of the world's knowledge ultimately shared? Every bit of information that we know has been passed down through the ages, and whether it be one or ten iterations later, it's still comes down to the fact that it's shared knowledge.
Now, if you're really talking about sharing the knowledge after it's twisted around like in a "telephone game" (what kids play when they whisper something to the next person and pass it on), that's a different story. In society today, people have a right to have a high level of distrust in a lot of the information they take in. It used to be true that newspapers and even the radio were reliable sources of information, but at the pace news is gathered these days, facts aren't held in place and verified like they used to be.
its about preventing the "pointy haired boss" scenarios
Like you say... information wants to be free. In today's world, its pretty easy to search for a pithy statement that makes you appear like you know what you're doing... when if fact you know pretty much nothing.
If you focus on systems that "share information," you're not really helping that much... it might be sufficient, but its a wasted opportunity.
If you instead focus on systems that "teach knowledge," that's a system that will truly bring you into the 21st century...
I'm a big fan of Richard Feynmann. He believed that any concept that was well known is teachable to the average college freshman. No matter what the concept is, he was confident that it should be explainable to you average 18-year-old. If not, one of two things is the case:
Of course, this is all predicated on the idea that we have the time we need to put together proper training materials... but the point is still valid.
teaching knowledge or teaching selection
Should we teach people knowledge, or maybe we should teach people how and what to select for knowledge?
both...
Firstly, we need people to understand that just because they read something, that doesn't mean its now knowledge. The obvious problem here is that what you just read might not be true. Therefore, we need a good course on critical thinking before we can turn information into knowledge.
Secondly, we need people who understand the value of teaching, and not just the value of sharing. Organizational learning is a very complex field, and it should be treated with respect. I don't know if the responsibility belongs to HR, IT, or individual departments... all I know is that nobody does enough of it.
Post new comment