Knowledge and Accountability
Soren Kierkegaard, the nineteenth century existentialist philosopher, told a story of a man who was released from an insane asylum after many years. The man was desperate to be perceived as a being normal by others. So he determined that he must say things in public that reflect the general beliefs of those around him. People believe that the world is round! So he put a rock in his pocket, one that is large enough to remind him to say this true thing every time it hits his thigh. The man walked merrily through town, acknowledging passers by and greeting them by saying, "The world is round" every time the rock hits his thigh. You can imagine the kind of response the man received.
Kierkegaard called this "objective madness," and it seems a logical connection to our efforts, as professionals and as a collective profession. Our efforts to share knowledge--any knowledge-- have met with positive results. But the sharing of any knowledge--regardless of its value and application--will not be valued for very long. It stands to reason, then, that our reliance on outside information sources must be balanced with a keen eye toward the value of the information that we provide to our customers. Merely sharing information regardless of its value would be true madness!
Knowledge management is quite often explained as being the collection and dissemination of true (or accurate) and useful information. But this standard is far to low for us to use in the workplace. Having access to lots of great information with little practical value is important, but not in a proactive, knowledge sharing exercise. Knowledge sharing is a matter of asking excellent questions, giving (or getting) great answers, and having great conversations that involve both. This raises that bar on the nature and scope of the "knowledge" that is shared in organizations. Knowledge that communicates what works, what succeeds, what has passed the test of application meets the standard for sharing. What is generally perceived as being true does not.
How then, do we, as information professionals, facilitate the sharing of real knowledge? There are various and sundry ways, some that are "one size fits all," most that are not. But we must, for we should be held accountable for this kind of knowledge sharing. Providing opportunities for our colleagues to feel "connected," facilitating cross-departmental learning, celebrating lessons learned from mistakes, creating an online collaborative community--these are all opportunities for us to bring real value to knowledge management and to increase our visibility and value in the workplace.
To aid you in your thinking on your knowledge management practices, this issue of Information Outlook has some wonderful articles in store for you. Nigel Oxbrow of TFPL, Ltd. in London shares what skills you need to succeed in a knowledge economy. Doug Wesley of Changecraft Corporation explains how you can attract the best and brightest knowledge workers. And we have a special treat for you, as Information Outlook interviews Nancy Dixon, author of Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know. Dr. Dixon is a professor of Administrative Sciences at The George Washington University in Washington, DC, and was recently appointed as faculty director of SLA's Knowledge Champions Institute, to be held next April.
Read on and avoid the madness!
David R. Bender, Ph.D
Executive Director
RSS
Feedback form
