Archive Page 2
Thinking in bloc (ks)…
Figure 1, Non-sequitur 8 March 2008
Well, it was bound to happen, I found an idea I can wrap around, get some legs on, gain some traction with, transform the universe, and other clichés. I suppose I had this idea buried in my head somewhere, but sometimes the simple word, idea, or concept can be (or is) the most elusive – stay tuned for the mathematical formula for this!
MODULAR
What was the most memorable part of The Graduate? For me it was in the opening few scenes an older man approaches Benjamin (Dustin Hoffman), and says only one word, “plastics.” Then he goes on to elaborate on this idea. OK, if plastic was the it word of the 1960s, what about the other decades? An interesting diversion…
Back to MODULAR. Well, the word of the week around my house is MODULAR. Everything is modular. What is meant by this? Sure at some level it’s just a way of explaining how everything fits together, is connected, or a way of breaking down something complex. But an interesting article I came across gave me the word I was looking for to explain why this is the it word of the week (or more), and why it matters: architecture, Benjamin, architecture.
ARCHITECTURE
No, I’m not replacing one word or idea for another. But the idea of architecture creates an instant mental model of what is meant by something, right? And more specifically, the idea – and I’m not an expert here yet so bear with me, that architecture is a way of explaining the built environment. Among the possible styles of architecting there is a MODULAR ARCHITECTURE style (hardware, software, and buildings – sorry the link isn’t to a definitive definition but a great example). Is it redundant to use MODULAR and ARCHITECTURE as a compound noun or descriptor?
I’ll have to play around with this idea for a little while, but I think this may be it…at least for me: modular architecture is the meaning of the universe*.
I’m working on how this fits in to my grander scheme – and specifically my thesis at this point, but this is where I’m at now. Modular architecture, of course, is only the organizing model or principle, and ideas about how and where this plugs into knowledge management has partially already been explored. Ron Sanchez, currently a visiting professor in Denmark (coincidence or not) is a leading proponent of modular architectures and how this shapes knowledge management.
More to follow as I build on these ideas…
* Sure on an existential and scientific level, atoms, strings, or whatever the current buzzword in the scientific community provides the stuff of building everything, and in that sense is the modular
architecture
thing upon which we all sit.
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
The Revenge of the DIKW Pyramid…
A long, long time ago, [cue music]…was there a reason George Lucas selected the pyramid? And what about the ancient Egyptians, Mayans, Aztecs, and Free Masons? Why a pyramid? Are we reaching for some Maslowian pinnacle of ordering these terms? And if the steps in this hierarchy implicitly suggest some kind of progress, progress towards what?
For me, looking at these key concepts in the world of KM it is not possible to completely disentangle them and say that “data is XYZ” and “wisdom is ABC.” I appreciate the efforts to make clear distinctions of these individual elements, but each by itself is meaningless – or lacks context. What’s data to me may be information to someone else, and so on up the DIKW food chain. I don’t want to suggest abandoning the need to clearly understand what each concepts means in some kind of PoMo post-industrial end of history kind of way; but without tangible reference points for each term (i.e., context or situation) I get stuck in an intellectual loop that while interesting doesn’t do anything for me other than spin some wheels.
So, let’s break down the wisdom hierarchy/pyramid
Since data, information, knowledge, and wisdom are the building blocks of wisdom use this analogy or metaphor rather than superimposing this on a pyramid:
OK, but this only gets me partially where I want to be. If each element contributes to the other (and most definitions are endlessly circular in their arrangements), why are they dissected to the nth degree? Some are quantifiable, some are qualitative…and this is starting to smell of professionalization. But of what? Oh, yeah, information science and knowledge management. Well, at some point I will come back to this idea and sort it out for myself. For now, can’t we all just get along…and keep the interlocked terms together?
Lastly, and I really need to work on this bizarre train of passing thought: whether it’s blocks, pyramids, or spheres, we seem to be using geometry to discuss these topics. And yet, I haven’t found a good reference that looks at the mathematical implications of this kind of modeling. If anyone out there is aware of something like this, I’d be most appreciative of some leads in this area – at some point I will wander further down this road anyway. Tangentially related to this, perhaps Foucault was right to use an archaeological analogy. Just another passing thought. Or was he?
Filed under: Knowledge Management | 4 Comments
File this one under information sharing.
As a strong supporter of Open Source and other meta-collaborative movements, I’m going to randomly save my favorite sites of the moment here. Like the rest of this blog, it is all about me. Hopefully, someone out there will appreciate this helping hand.
Here’s an interesting website I stumbled upon this afternoon: The Future Is Digital Archive.
If you’ve got nothing but time, there are worse places to wander on the Internet. Between CMU and Pittsburgh’s School of Information there should be a lot of exciting things to uncover here.
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
OK, I promise to lay off the PhotoShopping for a little while, but only a little while. But there is an ulterior motive in play here. We’re all given a certain set of tools to work, live, and play with. What we do with them, however, is supposed to be what makes a difference. Right?
As I skimmed through the trade and other professional journals, magazines, and other paper-based documents I read on a regular basis, this question came back up: certification or advanced degree? Before I started my studies at OU-Tulsa I asked this same question (and others before me) on the ITtoolbox website. (Loosely paraphrasing) “What’s the best way to go with the KM field: certification or advanced degree?” Among the several replies I received to this shotgun query was a range of “it depends,” “what’s the context,” and “if you can afford both, do both.” Well, of all places the IT Certification magazine has an article this week basically suggesting the advanced degree is the way to go. Which, luckily for me, is the path I am on now…although some kind of certification is in my immediate future. Here’s an interesting blog post on the certification journey (and worth bookmarking for all KMers out there…the “official” blog list doesn’t look that extensive yet).
The MSKM will provide the broad general framework for my future in the KM field, but matching this with technical proficiency in an area (or multiple) seems like the way to go. Currently, the program at OU-Tulsa does not offer courses or classes towards certification – or at least not explicitly. So, where do I turn? There are many online, in class, and other venues of opportunities for these kinds of specific technical training and certification programs. Here’s my generic short list for what it’s worth:
- Certified Knowledge Manager (KMPro)
- Knowledge Management Certification [several variations to choose from] (related to KMPro)
- Certified Knowledge Manager [two levels to choose from]
Obviously, KM touches and is related to many other disciplines (including, but not exclusively, the technology side) and areas of study, learning, and development. Since my emphasis is on the tech-side of things, I will lean this way for the most part. I will be adding some other areas to this list over time…and when I find that elusive round-tu-it!
Now, you’ll have to check back in another year or so to see if I followed up on any of these; but if nothing else this is a great organizing tool – and basically my purpose of this blog…it is all about me after all (at least for now). If you know of any other relevant certification programs and/or opportunities out there let me know, and I will gladly revised and update this list. I suppose at some point I will move this over to a more permanent part of this blog – next to my resume, etc…but with many other things that’s a ways down the road.
Happy Weekend!
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
I had a great starter conversation with my KM mentor the other day, and as you might imagine there was much information and knowledge sharing, transferring, and generally flittering about. One of the things that came out of this was my awareness that there’s a need for some professional development in our program (and probably for most newcomers to the field). I’ve accepted the invitation to work with the SLIS-side of the house on the Professional Development Committee (PDC)…so, all you KM lurkers from OU-Tulsa out there (or is this the quintessential Zen site?), send me your comments, suggestions, and ideas on what constitutes professional development for our field. And if anyone out there is working on redesigning the MSKM portal or web face…let me know (it needs some work).
My mentor was surprised to hear that the government has been big on KM for the last several years. Funny what you take for granted. Most government employees probably already filed KM under TQI, TQM, Six Sigma, Lean Six Sigma, etc. several years ago. Well, KM hasn’t faded away just yet, and in fact in the government it appears to be flourishing. Sure it’s mutating and adapting, but isn’t that the core of KM – change that is.
Anyway, before I lose track of this tidbit, here’s a fairly major national convention (I wouldn’t call it a conference since it’s basically a trade show in disguise) where a lot of the major movers-and-shakers in the government KM world meet and greet one another.
The 9th Annual Knowledge Management Conference & Exhibition
Anywho…here’s the notice for all KMers out there lurking on the infosphere (or my meager imitation of that amorphous glob):
Send me your ideas for what you want to see come out of the PDC!
Just add your comments to this posting, and we’ll go from there if we need to move to a different workspace or platform.
T H A N K S !
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
Off on another tangent…
I’m in the process of digesting an interesting article suggesting that information may not be human-centered. I will be coming back to this, but it sparked an idea that has been floating around my head amorphously for a little while now.
The Rational Choice Approach to Information/Knowledge
Any lurkers out there willing to shed some light on this for me…please jump in. We are supposedly in the midst of an information glut, surplus, or overload (insert your own descriptor here). What does this mean, why does it matter, and so what? If we are individually producing terabytes of data, information, or knowledge on an annual basis, what is it, why is it, and where is it?
Here’s an early stab at some of the information-seeking and behavior questions I’m wrestling with (could be Sumo): I look for the easiest, most complete information that will support my cause. Why? In the larger equation of balancing work, family, school, and other commitments I have to make a choice in allocating my resources. If I can accomplish my goals from my home office – yippee. If I need to call someone with expertise or experience (I rarely confuse these anymore) that’s acceptable – thanks to VOIP and cell phones long-distance charges are a thing of the past. If I need to go to a library or other “information store” I have to further calculate my tendency to wander off course (and topic) or expend my resources on those off-the-chart chance encounters.
When I started thinking about this, I went straight to my lifeline (Google + Google Scholar) and looked up “rational choice information.” The first hit on Google looked interesting, and I will read this at some point; but it’s not really what I am looking for. Google Scholar wasn’t much help either. This means either one of two things: (1) I’m in unchartered waters, again; or (2) the rational choice approach really is one of the motivational or background factors in other information theories.
On the flipside of this, there is CONTENT. That ubiquitous word in the b-world these days to refer to reusable, replaceable, and repeatable elements of information. Not necessarily full text insertions, but rather a “cherry-picking” of “low-hanging” fruit to drive down costs (overhead, production, etc.). So, is there a link between creating a “rational choice theory of information” and the move towards content? What might this say about knowledge – or that hypothetical higher-level activity inspiring, aspiring, and perspiring to universal awareness…at least in certain contexts, and under certain conditions…further rationalization of choice?
Well, if this tangent pays off in some other end…other than creating some interesting new links…you read it here first!
ECONOMICS OF INFORMATION
THE WEALTH OF INFORMATION
IN SEARCH OF INFORMATION
THE SEVEN HABITATS OF EFFECTIVE INFORMATION
THE EFFECTIVE INFORMATION EXECUTIVE
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
My email is talking to me…
File this one under either TMI or information overload – you decide.
Perhaps it’s the medication, or my email is really trying to say something to me. Consider these provocative subjects (I’ll spare you the links and the potential for spam):
My apologies if you represent or are represented by these products. In that case, you should probably be seeking some professional assistance and that’s not my bag.
- Brand Name Top Designer Shoes Boots and High Heels Gucci Prada Chanel & More
- Lovetrain
- Find a Massage School Near You
- New Psychology Programs Available Now
- Tired of lacking confidence because you have a small [their creative typing eluded my spam filter, but I'll keep this PG or at least R for now]
- [SPAM] – The Weather Channel wants to put a Walt Disney World® vacation in your forecast – Found word(s) 18 to enter enter now in
- From Amazon.com: New Releases in Science Fiction & Fantasy
- Build & Release Management: Understanding the Costs of Doing It Yourself
- Summer jobs available at Air Forces bases worldwide
OK, the last one is not spam, but it still has me rolling with the idea that my email is trying to say something to me – do I need to look for a new job, career, and purpose in life? NOT the senders or the messages per se, but I’m talking about the machine(s). HAL, are you out there – in there? Between the Viagra, Massage School, Business Schools, and Designer This-n-That…what does it all mean?
All fun aside, this idea got me thinking about the information overload we’re supposedly up to our hip-waders in right now. Until a few weeks ago I had a distanced relationship to INFORMATION (maybe even knowledge according to several reputable sources). That is, “it is what it is” to parody an NPR story from this morning taking a swing at our national diversion of late. Information was the quintessential other. IT (not I-T) was just something I looked for, pondered, used, often abused, but generally kept separate from the inner me. And I certainly did not have a personal relationship with it. With the exception of an old Tom Waits song that’s stuck in my head now (actually, the intro to “Better off without a wife” from Nighthawks at the Diner – did you know you can also get a framed print of the Hopper from Amazon? Isn’t the Internet amazing or what?), how can an animated person (yes, that would be me) have a relationship with an inanimate object, thing, or it? I love my car, but do I have a relationship with it? I love my computer; do I have a relationship with it? It keeps coming back to it
In the past couple of weeks, and somewhat as a byproduct of this blog-o-therapy, as some of the ideas bouncing around my brain and on various scraps of paper here and there started to coalesce into something tangible – a mini “Aha!” moment of sorts, I began to embrace the inner information in me (and outside me). Well, it’s not that touchy-feely yet; but I have started to look and think about these bits and bytes or stuff in a slightly different way. And this brings me back to the mathematical quandary I’m working my corner in to (or something like that).
While cleaning my email box this morning, 
was kind enough to offer some recommendations. I’m not sure what their ULTRA-SKUNKWORKS-
ish-like algorithm for calculating these preemptive marketing strategies looks like; but I’ve never purchased science fiction or fantasy books from Amazon. In fact, I’d have to say I’m not overly interested in these topics – in case you hadn’t figured it out yet I have enough issues with reality and daily life much less worrying about worm hole jumping aliens with multiple sexual organs (unless Amazon is trolling my junk mail folders). OK, I am a fan of the Star Wars series and Philip Dick. Yet, I still never bought or looked at anything remotely connected to Star Wars or Philip Dick at Amazon. Or is it my taste in movies and literature is bleeding over into my email consciousness and the Elbonians and Nigerians are filtering my kernels?
How and why does all this information, data, or knowledge matter? I’ll save the distinctions for now – although I think I had a previous mental note to get back to wrestling with these definitions and terms. Well, that’s for next week at least. Try this link for some more interesting connections…whatever happened to James Burke?
Well, until next time…see you at the diner!
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
Static Motion…
If this is supposed to be knowledge in motion…well, the mojo’s under the weather and the cat’s hitched a ride to Frisco.
Escher Healthcare
There’s probably a law against reposting this cartoon here, and if there is I’ll gladly remove this (courtesy of the Center for American Progress). It does capture current state of physical (and mental) health, but also hints at many of the issues and ideas that are rotating around my brain these days.
When I’m feeling better I’ll start to sort some of these out. I did just complete a short paper that got the major ideas organized – that helps. Now I’m waiting for the official and unofficial feedback. I debated whether to post it here, but I’ll hold off a little longer…not that I’m hording information, but I need to get it more polished even before my audience of one reads it…unless there are more lurkers out there?
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
Content-as-Quagmire…
Moving around and back to the information-as-thing-as-knowledge idea I have bouncing around in my head, I received an email today with a reminder why this is an issue and of interest to me. I’m on a mailing list with KMWorld, and they sent me something. I scan this website every couple of days, read the trade pub, and until the last few weeks I kept this compartmentalized part of my work life separate from just about everything else I do – except for the bits and pieces of appropriate information I glean from this portal. That’s when I had the proverbial “aha!” moment. It’s not separate; it’s part of my cognitive map (and that’s getting to be a pretty crowded place) and part of my project in this adventure in to Knowledge Management. I’ll spare you the systems theory connections for now, although I suspect this will come up again.
“Covering the latest in Content, Document and Knowledge Management” – tagline from their website
What really got me going today was this logo from the website’s homepage – and it shows up on most of their printed publications as well. SEEING these words in this arrangement, and in this location, set off a new train of ideas or possibilities. In this simple tagline (see my previous entry on making the simple more complex), this organization is conflating content with document with knowledge management. Does this translate to: content + document = knowledge management? Or would some kind of Boolean-Venn arrangement be more appropriate?
As I read this simple tagline (and perhaps I am reading too much into this catchy corporate slogan, or perhaps not), content is composed of documents and together in some fashion they create knowledge – which needs to be managed. Where does information (or data in this case –this is a very tech-heavy organization) fit in to all this? The underlying assumption I get out of this is that content = information (or data). Wouldn’t this support the idea that information is a thing or a parsed and packaged commodity? Well, I’ll have to work on this some more, but maybe someone out there gets where I’m heading.
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
Complex:Simple…Simple:Complex…
This will be a short entry – aren’t they all? This is mostly so I don’t lose this train of thought:
Why do we make the simple complex? And conversely, why do we need to simplify the complex?
For now, I’ll call this funneling knowledge. I considered filtering, but I need to broaden my analogies to avoid an over reliance, association, or dependency on computers – of course this raises the epistemological and ontological problems of these ideas, this medium, and the transactions taking or not taking place here.
No, I’m not digressing this time. This just happens to be a great example of why we (I know it’s not just me but I will personalize this a little to make everyone feel more secure) feel the need to complicate anything. Is it simply for the mental gymnastics? Am I trying to prove something? And why the use of the funnel? Why is the output knowledge? Is the output knowledge?
On the flipside of this, we (and again unless there really is a vast Right Wing Conspiracy out there against me this applies to most people I have known and met) feel the need to make simpler the complex. Again, this blog, in more general terms, is an attempt to take a complex set of ideas boil them down, and serve the final product (objects, things, cooked meals) in a simple way. The less is more mentalité. But it’s not always that simple and that’s partly why I chose the French concept of mentalité to poke fun at the Type-A crowd trying to get Real Simple. It carries (dare I say, conveys) more than just mentalities; it is a whole universe locked inside a single word – it’s simple but that’s just a façade (not that I’m overly fond of the French – I still have my issues with Foucault and that crowd. BUT when they’re right, they are really right – take the French Revolution (great idea; mixed results and problematic on the execution).
Can’t we deal with the complex in complex ways? And to paraphrase Rabbi Hillel, “If I can’t understand the complex, who will? If I am not complex, who is? If so, how?”
For those of you keeping track: I apologize for the overreliance on Wikipedia. At some point I will attempt to broaden my horizons, but for many reasons I really love this website. Not the least of which is the Open Source nature of it- yes, the link is a teaser…but that’s a topic for another day.
Filed under: Knowledge Management | Leave a Comment
-
Flickr Photos
More Photos 
Knowledge in MotionLibrary Thing
