The standard definition of data, information and knowledge (e.g. Bellinger(1997)) is of a liner model where data (raw facts) is processed to become information (processed facts) which in turn is processed to become knowledge (information used in a context to achieve something).
I think that this definition is flawed in two ways:
1. How do you know what data is relevant to a given situation? Don’t you need knowledge to choose relevant data initially
2. How can data be processed into information and information into knowledge without the use of knowledge.
The definition of data being raw or unprocessed fact, figures, symbols get seems to be fairly well accepted as is the definition that information is processed data. However, there seem to be little consensus as to what knowledge is, although several definitions (refs) define knowledge as information used in a context to achieve something.
I think that the KID model is more interrelated, that data, information and knowledge interact with each other. Knowledge is used to define data and process it into information as well as being data or information used in a context to achieve some meaningful goal.
Putting this into the context of a university.
At the end of the year every module in the university has a set of grade which have to be entered MISIS. At this point, the grades are data; they are just a list of figures. At the exam board, all the grades for each module are considered, along with the statistical summaries. At this point, the summaries become information; they can be used to indicate how well a module has run and to compare different modules. Later at the progression board, all the grades for each individual student are considered, these grades are again information, they allow judgements to be made about each student’s progress. After the boards, staff can use the student’s grade and their knowledge of the student to predict their final grade. Now staff are using previous knowledge they have about the student (i.e. the student attitude towards work, personal commitments etc.), their own expertise and the students grades to predict their future grade.
Bellinger, G., Castro, D. and Mills, A. (1997), ‘Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom’,
http://www.outsights.com/systems/dikw/dikw.htm
Thursday, January 29, 2009
What is the difference between Organisations, Social/Business Network and Communities of Practice (CoP)?
There is a plethora of definitions of organisations that can be found in the literature. The common theme among these definitions is the arrangement of people and objects to achieve a common goal. For more definitions about organisations and their behaviour see Robbins and Judge, (2009).
Wikipedia’s definition of organisations as “a social arrangement which pursues collective goals, controls its own performance, and has a boundary separating it from its environment” is as common as many others that can be found in the literature. For comparative definitions see Jones, (2008).
Social/Business Networks
Like many other terms there is no single definition for the term “Network”. Increasingly the qualification of a Network adds a significant contextualisation and descriptive interpretation to the term (e.g. social networks, computer networks, mathematical networks, neural networks and business networks). However, common threads among definitions of these types of networks are the attempt to define their structures and the use of terms such as nodes, cells and links is common.
In the case of a social network the nodes represent individuals or organisations and the links are the “things” which ties them together, such as friendship, vision etc. These common interests allow them to communicate with each other. Social networks go back thousands of years and understanding their roots has been studied in other feilds such as anthropology. The advent of the internet had added a new and some argues more “populous” definitions to the term. It now commonly refers to famous internet sites such as Facebook, YoTube, Friends United etc. Rosenthal, (1997) presents an interesting examination of Social networks and team performance. She examines how the structure of relationships (links) can enhance or impede team performance. She concluded that interactions within social networks can affect team performance.
The term Business Networks could be confusing in this context as it normally refers to organisations that serve the interest of its members such as Business Link, Institute of Directors etc. Whilst some coverage of KM can be found in relation to social network, little is available in relation to Business Networks. An illustrative difference between Business organisations and Business Networks is that in Business Organisations the binding theme is financial survival whilst in Business Networks the binding theme is common interest.
Community of Practice (CoP)
The concept of a community of practice (CoP) refers to the process of social learning that occurs among humans with emphasis on creation and dissemination of knowledge among this “community”. CoP has received significant attention in the KM literature, for example, Ardichvili et al, (2006) and Kimble et al (2005).
Kimble et al (2005) examine the relationship KM and CoP in general and especially virtual CoP. They conclude that for KM to work in a CoP, there needs to be a balance between both hard and soft knowledge, and that the failure of many KM initiatives is due to the lack of facilities for people to communicate and interact socially.
Whilst Ardichvili et al, (2006) explore cultural factors influencing knowledge sharing strategies in virtual CoP where members are in different countries. They conclude that all KM systems must be tailored to the cultural need and preferences of the employee in the host country.
Examples
How do these definitions relate to a university?
As an Organisation
The staff in a university are a group of individuals who work together to educate students and to carry out research and consultancy, these can be viewed as their main goals. A university has a finite structure and therefore has boundaries which separate it from other universities and the world.
Within the university, staff are grouped into subject areas called schools, these can also be viewed as organisations.
As a Social Network
Most staff also have contacts or other individual, with which they interact, both inside and outside the university. These can be viewed as social networks, individuals who are communicating to exchange ideas with common interest and professional relationships (links).
As a CoP
Most staff have research interests and belong to research groups which meet to discuss their research interests, these are communities of practice with emphasis on creating and disseminating knowledge.
References
Ardichvili, A., et al, (2006) “Cultural influences on Knowledge sharing through online communities of practice”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp 94-107.
Jones, G. R. (2008), “Organizational Theory, Design, and Change”, 5/E Pearson.
Kimble, C., P. Hildreth (2005), “Dualities, distributed communities of practice and knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp 102-113.
Robbins, O. S. P., T A. Judge (2009) “Organizational Behaviour”, 13/E, Pearson.
Rosenthal, E. (1997) “Social networks and team performance”, Team Performance Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp288-294.
Reflections and Personal Learning
This week in the workshop session, individual organisations (groups) presented an organisational view point of their findings and understanding of this week’s topic areas to the other organisations with the CoP (class). This was an amalgamation of the group’s individual member’s personal research and a group discussion. Each group also explained how they interacted together and what methods and tools they used.
The groups took very different approaches to transferring their knowledge both within their own groups and also to the whole class. It was very interesting how different people interacted with each other and also their varying view point on the topic area, some of which was very different to my own interpretation.
Wikipedia’s definition of organisations as “a social arrangement which pursues collective goals, controls its own performance, and has a boundary separating it from its environment” is as common as many others that can be found in the literature. For comparative definitions see Jones, (2008).
Social/Business Networks
Like many other terms there is no single definition for the term “Network”. Increasingly the qualification of a Network adds a significant contextualisation and descriptive interpretation to the term (e.g. social networks, computer networks, mathematical networks, neural networks and business networks). However, common threads among definitions of these types of networks are the attempt to define their structures and the use of terms such as nodes, cells and links is common.
In the case of a social network the nodes represent individuals or organisations and the links are the “things” which ties them together, such as friendship, vision etc. These common interests allow them to communicate with each other. Social networks go back thousands of years and understanding their roots has been studied in other feilds such as anthropology. The advent of the internet had added a new and some argues more “populous” definitions to the term. It now commonly refers to famous internet sites such as Facebook, YoTube, Friends United etc. Rosenthal, (1997) presents an interesting examination of Social networks and team performance. She examines how the structure of relationships (links) can enhance or impede team performance. She concluded that interactions within social networks can affect team performance.
The term Business Networks could be confusing in this context as it normally refers to organisations that serve the interest of its members such as Business Link, Institute of Directors etc. Whilst some coverage of KM can be found in relation to social network, little is available in relation to Business Networks. An illustrative difference between Business organisations and Business Networks is that in Business Organisations the binding theme is financial survival whilst in Business Networks the binding theme is common interest.
Community of Practice (CoP)
The concept of a community of practice (CoP) refers to the process of social learning that occurs among humans with emphasis on creation and dissemination of knowledge among this “community”. CoP has received significant attention in the KM literature, for example, Ardichvili et al, (2006) and Kimble et al (2005).
Kimble et al (2005) examine the relationship KM and CoP in general and especially virtual CoP. They conclude that for KM to work in a CoP, there needs to be a balance between both hard and soft knowledge, and that the failure of many KM initiatives is due to the lack of facilities for people to communicate and interact socially.
Whilst Ardichvili et al, (2006) explore cultural factors influencing knowledge sharing strategies in virtual CoP where members are in different countries. They conclude that all KM systems must be tailored to the cultural need and preferences of the employee in the host country.
Examples
How do these definitions relate to a university?
As an Organisation
The staff in a university are a group of individuals who work together to educate students and to carry out research and consultancy, these can be viewed as their main goals. A university has a finite structure and therefore has boundaries which separate it from other universities and the world.
Within the university, staff are grouped into subject areas called schools, these can also be viewed as organisations.
As a Social Network
Most staff also have contacts or other individual, with which they interact, both inside and outside the university. These can be viewed as social networks, individuals who are communicating to exchange ideas with common interest and professional relationships (links).
As a CoP
Most staff have research interests and belong to research groups which meet to discuss their research interests, these are communities of practice with emphasis on creating and disseminating knowledge.
References
Ardichvili, A., et al, (2006) “Cultural influences on Knowledge sharing through online communities of practice”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp 94-107.
Jones, G. R. (2008), “Organizational Theory, Design, and Change”, 5/E Pearson.
Kimble, C., P. Hildreth (2005), “Dualities, distributed communities of practice and knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp 102-113.
Robbins, O. S. P., T A. Judge (2009) “Organizational Behaviour”, 13/E, Pearson.
Rosenthal, E. (1997) “Social networks and team performance”, Team Performance Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp288-294.
Reflections and Personal Learning
This week in the workshop session, individual organisations (groups) presented an organisational view point of their findings and understanding of this week’s topic areas to the other organisations with the CoP (class). This was an amalgamation of the group’s individual member’s personal research and a group discussion. Each group also explained how they interacted together and what methods and tools they used.
The groups took very different approaches to transferring their knowledge both within their own groups and also to the whole class. It was very interesting how different people interacted with each other and also their varying view point on the topic area, some of which was very different to my own interpretation.
My Knowledge Management Blog
I am currently a part-time student on the MSc Knowledge Management programme at Middlesex University.
This blog is being created as part of the Knowledge Management Strategies module.
The purpose of this blog is to record and organise my learning about Knowledge Management. Hopefully it will help me gain an insight into what Knowledge Management is, and how is can be deployed with various organisations.
Please feel free to share your thought and knowledge with me, especially how Knowledge management is used within your own organisations.
This blog is being created as part of the Knowledge Management Strategies module.
The purpose of this blog is to record and organise my learning about Knowledge Management. Hopefully it will help me gain an insight into what Knowledge Management is, and how is can be deployed with various organisations.
Please feel free to share your thought and knowledge with me, especially how Knowledge management is used within your own organisations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)