Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 05-30-1998 09:47
    Regarding the exchange between Ken Miller and Rick Dove
    regarding knowledge management, history, etc...

    The shift to knowledge work (roughly 1920-1980) upset the
    management control applecart.

    One of two key differences between knowledge workers and
    other kinds of workers is that knowledge workers work ON
    information and knowledge. Both knowledge workers and other
    workers use their heads as well as their hands (and
    sometimes backs) but other workers can be seen (literally)
    to be working ON materials. So, although all workers use
    and work with knowledge and information, only the knowledge
    worker works ON them.

    A second key difference is that most knowledge workers are
    required to CONFIGURE their responses to a given situation
    whereas most other workers carry out PREFIGURED responses
    (i.e., work routines that have been figured by others, most
    notably, industrial engineers, etc.).

    The "old" management practices, if I can call them that,
    worked reasonably well for the era of materials-based work
    and working. Why? Because the interactions of interest
    were physical; they could be observed, studied, and improved
    upon in systematic ways. That, in essence, is what Fred
    Taylor did. Human beings were essentially cogs in the
    industrial machinery (a fact which Charlie Chaplin
    obligingly pointed out).

    The shift to knowledge work disrupted the chain-of-command
    that served to tie the brawn of workers to the mind of
    management. What matters now are the minds of the workers,
    not their muscles. That, in a nutshell, is what knowledge
    work, knowledge workers, and knowledge management are all
    about.

    However, there is still plenty of the old kind of work still
    around and so the question arises, "Why can't we manage
    knowledge work and knowledge workers one way, and manage the
    rest the old-fashioned way? In a word, the answer is
    "equity." It is politically impractical to manage knowledge
    workers one way and the rest some other way. The result, if
    you could pull it off, would be a caste system much worse
    than the one that now separates managers and workers.

    So, for political reasons, management has to reinvent the
    practice of management. The current emphasis on knowledge
    management is one portion of the attempt to do that. So are
    some other recent occurrences (e.g., reengineering).

    Just some thoughts...

    By the way, you can find a 1983 paper of mine about the
    shift to knowledge work at the following URL:

    http://home.att.net/~nickols/articles.htm

    Once there, look for the article about What Is in the World
    of Work and Working.

    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    fnickols@ets.org


  • 2.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 06-01-1998 01:11
    On Sat, 30 May 1998 fred nickols wrote Re: Knowledge Management
    >
    >Regarding the exchange between Ken Miller and Rick Dove
    >regarding knowledge management, history, etc...
    >
    >The shift to knowledge work (roughly 1920-1980) upset the
    >management control applecart.
    >
    >One of two key differences between knowledge workers and
    >other kinds of workers is that knowledge workers work ON
    >information and knowledge. [...]
    >A second key difference is that most knowledge workers are
    >required to CONFIGURE their responses to a given situation
    >whereas most other workers carry out PREFIGURED responses
    >(i.e., work routines that have been figured by others, most
    >notably, industrial engineers, etc.).

    Fred's view makes sense to me -- with a couple of twists. Let's include
    not just "industry" but also the Arts, Medicine and other endeavors of man.
    With this perspective another cause-effect is suggested -- that a shift to
    KW did not occur -- even in industry. The shift that occurred (roughly
    1920 to 1980) was not from regular work to knowledge work but from KW by
    academia to KW by business people. That is, knowledge work used to be done
    by academia. But they started becoming irrelevant, both in topic and
    capacity, in 1920 and became largely irrelevant by 1980. Lacking any other
    source of people working ON information and producing knowledge, business
    had to start doing this, internally.

    This is not to say that academia has not been busy and productive. But
    there are indications that an increasing portion of academia does not have
    the "machinery" to do the job (Descartes is Dead) nor the capacity to meet
    demand.

    Jack Ring
    Innovation Management
    sendmail: jring@amug.org
    -


  • 3.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 01-19-1999 11:34
    Unless you enjoy recreating the wheel or have an interest in furthering the
    hype-gnosis currently being propagated by the IS and Consulting tribes to
    cover up the fact that their promises regarding Information Resource
    Management never paid off, you may find useful:

    "The Optimum Utilization of Knowledge, Making Knowledge Serve Human
    Betterment," Boulding, Kenneth and Lawrence Senesh, Westview Press,
    Boulder, CO, 1983.

    "Producing Useful Knowledge for Organizations," Edited by Killman, Ralph,
    Thomas, Kenneth W., Slevin, Dennis, Nath, Raghu and Jerrell, S. Lee.
    Praeger Scientific, 1983.

    Jack Ring
    32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
    sendmail: jring@amug.org
    602-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax)602-488-4616
    Better make your New Year's Eve reservations early.


  • 4.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 11-21-2001 11:00
    Tony:

    I believe you have to derive a work-plan based on research on Knowledge
    management and subject matters. You then need to carryout industrial
    case studies to prove or disprove your points. I have done some research
    on Knowledge management to product development. You may find the
    following 3 references/ publications useful. Take a look.

    FYI
    =====================

    "Total Value Management -- A Knowledge Management Concept for
    Integrating TQM into Concurrent Process and Product Development," The
    Journal of Knowledge and Process Management, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
    Knowledge & Process Management., ISSN 1092-4604, Volume 8, No 2, pp
    105-122, 2001.

    "Product Process and Methodology Systematization to Handle Structural
    Complexity in Product Realization", Journal of Systems Research and
    Behavior Science, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publication, Vol. 18, No. 6,
    2001.

    "Languages for Knowledge Capture and their Use in Creation of Smart
    Models", A Chapter of the Book - Industrial Knowledge management - A
    Micro Level Approach. Editor: Rajkumar Roy, London: Springer-Verlag,
    2000, ISBN 1-85233-339-1, pp. 525-548, 2001.

    ===================

    Let me know if I could be of any other help,

    Thanks,


    Brian Prasad

    Managing Director
    P.O. Box 3882
    Tustin, CA 92782, USA
    Tel: (714) 389-2662/Fax: (714) 389-2662
    Email: Prasadb1@home.com
    Useful Web Sites:
    http://www.ceconf.com/
    http://www.spec2market.com/
    http://www.ceteam.com/
    http://www.ceraj.com/


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Tony Nolan" <t.nolan@uts.edu.au>
    To: <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 1:19 PM
    Subject: Knowledge Management


    > Good Morning,
    >
    > I have been working on a new taxomony for knowledge management and
    > knowledge usage in decision making. I have been exploring how to do a
    > transdiscipline approach on theories from the biological, information
    > science, educational, decision sciences and supporting it with some
    > mathematical modeling and computational databases.
    >
    > Im now at the stage where I can even survey groups or individuals and
    > plot there knowledge usage in decision making, and classify it by the
    > taxomony and other descriptive variables. So i can now compare an
    > individual knowledge maps against another individual or group.
    >
    > But where I am lost is how to apply this to the teaching world. DO i
    > need to case study, publish, test, or what other options are there ?
    >
    > Warm Regards
    > Tony Nolan OAM
    > Uni of Tech - Sydney
    >


    Dr. Brian Prasad
    Managing Director
    P.O. Box 3882
    Tustin, CA 92782, USA
    Tel: (714) 389-2662/Fax: (714) 389-2662
    Email: Prasadb1@home.com
    Useful Web Sites:
    http://www.ceconf.com/
    http://www.spec2market.com/
    http://www.ceteam.com/
    http://www.ceraj.com/


  • 5.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 01-05-2003 09:10
    Conna Condon writes:

    >David Fearon said:
    >""Those consultants". They sell "it" before it's
    >time. Some years back, "it" was quality mangement. Now, "it" is
    >knowledge management. "
    >
    >Conna contemplates:
    >
    >To have an "it" aren't we creating a boundary to create a product that is
    >sold? Is it the role of a consultant to sell a formula answer? Or, are
    >would we serve our customers better with research based custom solutions?
    >
    >Can consultants run their businesses as marketeers rather than salesman?
    >
    >(going back to my corner to behave).

    Hmm. I'm a consultant but that's about as informative as saying that I'm a
    human being. There are so many kinds of consultants, ranging from the lone
    independent to the massive firm and everything in between (including
    "temps"). Personally, I've never "sold" anything; that's probably because
    I've also never "marketed"; I've always relied on repeat business and
    referrals (which, of course, could be viewed as a marketing strategy of
    sorts but it's not a very aggressive one). Basically, I've always waited
    for the phone to ring -- and, fortunately, sooner or later, it has.

    But I'm a far cry from the kind of consultant you'll find at Accenture or
    Cap Gemini or McKinsey or Booz-Allen or any of the other big consulting
    firms. At those firms, consulting is big business, not a professional
    practice and I suspect the notion of consulting as a helping profession
    would draw howls of derision at those firms.

    My approach to consulting has always been to view it as a helping
    profession and I've always kept in mind that help is frequently best
    defined by the recipient. So, in the end, there's never been anything to
    sell or to market except me. And, although I've always viewed consulting
    as a professional practice and as a way of "making a living," I've never
    viewed it as a "business." For some strange reason I've always felt good
    about that.

    (going back to my corner to be quiet)



    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    Distance Consulting
    nickols@safe-t.net
    www.nickols.us


  • 6.  Knowledge Management

    Posted 01-05-2003 15:35
    One more reason for me to admire Fred! I like the idea of consulting as a "helping" profession. That is the way I treat it when I consult, but then I have never been associated with the "big business" of consulting. I doubt if I would survive.
    Thank you, Fred.
    Edryce
    Fred Nickols <nickols@safe-t.net> wrote:Conna Condon writes:

    >David Fearon said:
    >""Those consultants". They sell "it" before it's
    >time. Some years back, "it" was quality mangement. Now, "it" is
    >knowledge management. "
    >
    >Conna contemplates:
    >
    >To have an "it" aren't we creating a boundary to create a product that is
    >sold? Is it the role of a consultant to sell a formula answer? Or, are
    >would we serve our customers better with research based custom solutions?
    >
    >Can consultants run their businesses as marketeers rather than salesman?
    >
    >(going back to my corner to behave).

    Hmm. I'm a consultant but that's about as informative as saying that I'm a
    human being. There are so many kinds of consultants, ranging from the lone
    independent to the massive firm and everything in between (including
    "temps"). Personally, I've never "sold" anything; that's probably because
    I've also never "marketed"; I've always relied on repeat business and
    referrals (which, of course, could be viewed as a marketing strategy of
    sorts but it's not a very aggressive one). Basically, I've always waited
    for the phone to ring -- and, fortunately, sooner or later, it has.

    But I'm a far cry from the kind of consultant you'll find at Accenture or
    Cap Gemini or McKinsey or Booz-Allen or any of the other big consulting
    firms. At those firms, consulting is big business, not a professional
    practice and I suspect the notion of consulting as a helping profession
    would draw howls of derision at those firms.

    My approach to consulting has always been to view it as a helping
    profession and I've always kept in mind that help is frequently best
    defined by the recipient. So, in the end, there's never been anything to
    sell or to market except me. And, although I've always viewed consulting
    as a professional practice and as a way of "making a living," I've never
    viewed it as a "business." For some strange reason I've always felt good
    about that.

    (going back to my corner to be quiet)



    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    Distance Consulting
    nickols@safe-t.net
    www.nickols.us


    ---------------------------------
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now