ikms newsletter

Book Review: The Wisdom of Crowds

The Wisdom of Crowds
by James Surowiecki (2004)

Summarised by Lee Yee Fuang

James Surowiecki, the New Yorker financial columnist, provocatively argues that, in many circumstances, the crowds collectively reach better decisions, solve problems more efficiently and even predict the future better than the smartest man or woman alone. This challenges our mental model that valuable knowledge is concentrated in a very few hands, therefore key to solving problems or making good decisions is finding that one right person who will have the answer. His central argument is supported by social scientists who salute "self-organising, decentralized systems," (p. 70).

On the Characteristics of Knowledge (by Lee Chu Keong)

Knowledge has been described as a slippery and esoteric concept. This has made it very difficult to define and very difficult to distinguish from information. Knowledge managers must be cognizant of some of the interesting characteristics of knowledge when they attempt to manage knowledge by embarking knowledge initiatives, typically efforts to encouraeg knowledge sharing, knowledge creation, or knowledge codification. In this brief article, I draw on various examples to illustrate some of the more interesting characteristics of knowledge. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, but meant for reflection and contemplation by those who are intrigued by the ethereal qualities of knowledge.

iKMS SIG Report: Intellectual Capital Management

Angie, Swee Siong, Hui Ying, Andrew and Wesley were attending an Intellectual Capital seminar organized by Dr. Christopher Yeung. Wesley looked puzzled after Dr. Yeung explained the basic concept of intellectual capital.

Wesley: “ Dr. Yeung, I still don’t understand, how come an organization can have a market capitalization of $85 billion when the fixed asset is only $930 million?”

Dr. Yeung: “It is all about intangibles; goodwill if you like, the intellectual capital of an organization….”

KM and the More Competitive Law Firm

iKMS and corporate member LexisNexis partnered to present our third KM Seminar this year, focused on KM for law firms. The half day event was held on 5 August, and attracted 25 participants, representing 13 law firms, 5 government agencies, and legal personnel from a corporate legal department and the educational sector.

Knowledge of Ourselves and Knoledge of the Things Around Us

Don't you think that our knowledge of the things around us is so great (we have calculated the value of *pi* to 1.2 trillion digits -- yes, this is the number that is frequently approximat in our calculations involving circles as 22-over-7), and our knowledge of ourselves miniscule?

The humna being is full of paradoxes and conundrums -- all defy understanding -- all defy "knowledge". Perhaps this is because human being is knowledge itself!

Reference:

See: http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5638320%255E1702,00.html

Knowledge as a Journey

Knowledge can be seen as a point, a stop, a station, in a *journey*.

To Daveport and Prusak, the "journey" consist of the following cognitive stations:

Data ... Information ... Knowledge ... Wisdom [DIKW]

To others, though, the "journey" passes through different stations:

George Por: Data ... Information ... Knowledge ... Intelligence ... Wisdom [DIKIW]

Russell Ackoff: Data ... Information ... Knowledge ... Understanding ... Wisdom [DIKUW]

The Nonsense of Knowledge Management

Professor Wilson wrote an article entitled "The Nonsense of Knowledge Management" (available at http://informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html).

His conclusion is interesting:

The conclusion is reached that "knowledge management" is an umbrella term for a variety of organizational activities, none of which are concerned with the management of knowledge. Those activities that are not concerned with the management of information are concerned with the management of work practices, in the expectation that changes in such areas as communication practice will enable information sharing.

These are some questions that come to mind after reading his article:

1. are Wilson's criticisms valid?
2. how have the criticisms come about? (what/where are their roots?)
2a. has it got to do with how KM has been implemented?
2b. has it got to do with an over-emphasis on technology
2c. has it got to do with how knowledge has been defined? (objects vs process)
3. how to address these criticisms (Wilson’s criticisms are very difficult to deny)

LCK