Picture a man at the train station. I found this example on the Internet about the difference between data, information and knowledge. The train tables on the station show data about train schedules. The way the data is presented produces information informing users about the train departures, etc. Knowledge however is produced by the person in front of this schedule, knowing from experience that a certain train will arrive first, even though it left later. (a free translation of: www.hemmis.be/producten/emaserver/emaserverkendata.htm) What do you want? Youve probably heard this question enough when searching for a career. Knowledge management starts when you have to find your first job and knowledge management will keep you company when moving forward with ever next step. For every question what do I want - you will think about; what do I have? What are my capabilities and competences? Simple. There are many careers that are quite transparent; most medical careers, accounting and to a lesser extent law. Many other careers are much more ambiguous. You may study engineering but favor a sales oriented job. It is easy if you know what you want, but when you are in front of the gate of the university, you are not aware of the destination. Knowledge management. Knowledge management is just taking care of this gap between wish and reality, between the future and now. Knowledge management is about coming into action, because you know what you want (to achieve). For a company this is not really different although that there are many individuals in a group that is moving into same direction. Nobody really knows into what direction exactly and what knowledge is therefore suitable. Learning. Continuous learning seems one solution of bridging knowledge gaps. As long as you are eager to learn you will get there in the end (and hopefully a bit sooner). But learning is not always the solution. First of all it is expensive. Secondly it requires a sequential process; first you learn than you do. First we go to school, and then we start working. Besides that, learning doesnt always trigger new actions. And that is in the end what a company needs. Action. On the job. On the job learning is a best practice that has proven itself worthy. One disadvantage of this style is that the knowledge gaining process is merely implicit; you know what seems to work well, but your organization (you) doesnt know why. And if you do not know why, you cant judge either whether this way is applicable in another environment. Exchanging experiences. We all know the example of someone who joins a new organization, bringing in new knowledge. Valuable knowledge. But this new employee also needs to learn a lot about the way this organization functions. There is a mismatch. But that is not too much of a problem as long as there is a will to cooperate and to share ideas how things were done on either side. Bottom line. What matters therefore is not the amount of knowledge that people carry with them, but the "amount" of attitude in which they are willing to share this. Knowing this; If you are to manage knowledge you do not have to focus on knowledge as content, but mostly on the way this knowledge process takes place. Then you can also be confident that the man who is standing in front of the time tables is not alone. 2006 Hans Bool |
