Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  KM academics and practitioners

    Posted 01-04-2003 13:13
    A very important aspect of knowledge production and utilization that has
    been ignored by both academics and KM practitioners is the quality of
    knowledge. As Will Rogers said, "It ain't what we don't know that hurts us,
    it's what we know --- that ain't so."

    One benefit of the emerging KM fad is that the quality of knowledge is
    becoming a "discussable." But the benefit is not keeping pace with the
    mounting horde of KM witchdoctors. Academics could help considerably by
    elucidating how to detect and suppress erroneous or distracting knowledge
    and inappropriate "sources of knowledge.".


    --------Original Message ------------------
    > Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 09:16:01 -0500
    > From: "Fearon, David (Management)" <Fearon@mail.ccsu.edu>
    > Subject: Re: Knowledge management ...
    >
    > Thank you, Ken. This braces the conversation nicely. I see an old
    > familiar refrain. "Those consultants". They sell "it" before it's
    > time. Some years back, "it" was quality mangement. Now, "it" is
    > knowledge management. Have we not been chatting lately about closing
    > the gap between practitioners and academics? I agree that we have an
    > opportunity, if not a responsibility, to dig for those deeper issues.
    > But, in the meantime, practitioners turn to consultants for answers
    > to how they can refuel the engines of their flagging businesses. Ropes
    > are being thrown and grabbed. How do we accellerate our process of
    > tying those ropes to something solid? Or, perhaps, it is easier to
    > tell our students beware of consultants bearing old wine in new bottles
    > and say the "fad" work with a knowing wink?
    >
    > David


  • 2.  KM academics and practitioners

    Posted 01-06-2003 09:25
    Thank you, Jack. This is quite a tall order, to detect and supress.
    Is anyone out there familiar with some academics who are doing this
    regarding the quality of knowledge about knowledge management itself?
    I'd like not to take in the eludicating and correcting all by myself.

    David



    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jack Ring [mailto:jring@amug.org]
    Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 1:13 PM
    To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
    Subject: Re: [MG-ED-DV] KM academics and practitioners


    A very important aspect of knowledge production and utilization that has
    been ignored by both academics and KM practitioners is the quality of
    knowledge. As Will Rogers said, "It ain't what we don't know that hurts us,
    it's what we know --- that ain't so."

    One benefit of the emerging KM fad is that the quality of knowledge is
    becoming a "discussable." But the benefit is not keeping pace with the
    mounting horde of KM witchdoctors. Academics could help considerably by
    elucidating how to detect and suppress erroneous or distracting knowledge
    and inappropriate "sources of knowledge.".


    --------Original Message ------------------
    > Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 09:16:01 -0500
    > From: "Fearon, David (Management)" <Fearon@mail.ccsu.edu>
    > Subject: Re: Knowledge management ...
    >
    > Thank you, Ken. This braces the conversation nicely. I see an old
    > familiar refrain. "Those consultants". They sell "it" before it's
    > time. Some years back, "it" was quality mangement. Now, "it" is
    > knowledge management. Have we not been chatting lately about closing
    > the gap between practitioners and academics? I agree that we have an
    > opportunity, if not a responsibility, to dig for those deeper issues.
    > But, in the meantime, practitioners turn to consultants for answers
    > to how they can refuel the engines of their flagging businesses. Ropes
    > are being thrown and grabbed. How do we accellerate our process of
    > tying those ropes to something solid? Or, perhaps, it is easier to
    > tell our students beware of consultants bearing old wine in new bottles
    > and say the "fad" work with a knowing wink?
    >
    > David