Comments on: The business of information http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/ Life in Perpetual Beta Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:59:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Reference: Personal Aggregate, Filter & Connect Strategies « Public Intelligence Blog http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-194255 Reference: Personal Aggregate, Filter & Connect Strategies « Public Intelligence Blog Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:36:49 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-194255 [...] talks about it as part of personal knowledge management, Harold Jarche has discussed it as both a general model for business and for personal knowledge management (an idea that Jack Vinson picked up, and connected to the [...] [...] talks about it as part of personal knowledge management, Harold Jarche has discussed it as both a general model for business and for personal knowledge management (an idea that Jack Vinson picked up, and connected to the [...]

]]> By: Jon Husband http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193856 Jon Husband Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:40:25 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193856 @Paul <i>20 years ago, the upper management had the information and therefore the power, now that everyone has the information available in multiple streams, the role of upper management changes from deliver of content to facilitator and coach – a paradigm shifting phenomenon. </i> They (upper management) still do, by and large .. or at least often have critical information that the other levels do not have, or only get in diluted forms ... but yes, the game is changing. Your italicized comment above is a key aspect of what it means to operate as a leader or manager in a wirearchy, in my opinion. Yes, the potential for a paradigm shift is at hand. Any of you remember all the talk of paradigm shifts (to the Information Age) back about 20 years ago, and everybody nodding knowingly? Well, I think it's only just about now that it's starting to bite the average Jane or Joe in the butt .. or feed them new and interesting, and sometimes useful, grist for the mill. @Paul

20 years ago, the upper management had the information and therefore the power, now that everyone has the information available in multiple streams, the role of upper management changes from deliver of content to facilitator and coach – a paradigm shifting phenomenon.

They (upper management) still do, by and large .. or at least often have critical information that the other levels do not have, or only get in diluted forms … but yes, the game is changing.

Your italicized comment above is a key aspect of what it means to operate as a leader or manager in a wirearchy, in my opinion. Yes, the potential for a paradigm shift is at hand.

Any of you remember all the talk of paradigm shifts (to the Information Age) back about 20 years ago, and everybody nodding knowingly? Well, I think it’s only just about now that it’s starting to bite the average Jane or Joe in the butt .. or feed them new and interesting, and sometimes useful, grist for the mill.

]]> By: Harold Jarche http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193845 Harold Jarche Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:31:04 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193845 Which shows, quite nicely, why tacit knowledge cannot be captured and conversations between apprentices, journeymen and masters need to be as unfettered as possible. Which shows, quite nicely, why tacit knowledge cannot be captured and conversations between apprentices, journeymen and masters need to be as unfettered as possible.

]]> By: Steve Barth http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193844 Steve Barth Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:51:34 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193844 Isn't this why there is such a bandwidth bottleneck when trying to make tacit knowledge explicit. You can only really have a "tacit" exchange between two like-minded experts, where most of the learning is subtext, anyway. ( I use the example of Picasso studying Velasquez' "Las Meninas"). What I was thinking of in my comment above is about how much the expert chooses to explain to a journeyman, novice or outsider when the context and caveats require a lifetime of experience to comprehend. Then there is also the problem of available time, which people are starting to recognize as an issue in collaboration. The longer that learning conversation takes, the less time there is for the doing, eh? Isn’t this why there is such a bandwidth bottleneck when trying to make tacit knowledge explicit. You can only really have a “tacit” exchange between two like-minded experts, where most of the learning is subtext, anyway. ( I use the example of Picasso studying Velasquez’ “Las Meninas”).

What I was thinking of in my comment above is about how much the expert chooses to explain to a journeyman, novice or outsider when the context and caveats require a lifetime of experience to comprehend.

Then there is also the problem of available time, which people are starting to recognize as an issue in collaboration. The longer that learning conversation takes, the less time there is for the doing, eh?

]]> By: Harold Jarche http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193843 Harold Jarche Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:41:34 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193843 In tacit knowledge exchanges, I would say that understanding of the context and caveats on usage would be rather important. I guess it's one more thing to consider when sharing. Thanks for your perspective, Steve. In tacit knowledge exchanges, I would say that understanding of the context and caveats on usage would be rather important. I guess it’s one more thing to consider when sharing. Thanks for your perspective, Steve.

]]> By: Steve Barth http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193842 Steve Barth Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:14:52 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193842 Hi Harold, my filters just alerted me to this great exchange. I absolutely agree that “We cannot master all the knowledge needed for our work.” Now, doesn’t that imply that someone else has mastered knowledge we need? And in return, aren’t we responsible for mastering something others won’t know? To the extent that mastery requires not only specialization but focus, does stewardship sometimes get mislabeled as hoarding? I think we know more together when we know different things separately—and then share. Paul, an expert may appear reluctant to share if he/she gives short answers rather than wanting to burden the asker with extraneous information they won’t understand. That isn’t necessarily anti-social, is it? (By the way, a related reason why some people don’t always share is worry that a non-expert will misuse the knowledge because they lack the context and contingencies.) Hi Harold, my filters just alerted me to this great exchange. I absolutely agree that “We cannot master all the knowledge needed for our work.” Now, doesn’t that imply that someone else has mastered knowledge we need? And in return, aren’t we responsible for mastering something others won’t know? To the extent that mastery requires not only specialization but focus, does stewardship sometimes get mislabeled as hoarding? I think we know more together when we know different things separately—and then share.

Paul, an expert may appear reluctant to share if he/she gives short answers rather than wanting to burden the asker with extraneous information they won’t understand. That isn’t necessarily anti-social, is it? (By the way, a related reason why some people don’t always share is worry that a non-expert will misuse the knowledge because they lack the context and contingencies.)

]]> By: Personal Aggregate, Filter & Connect Strategies « Aggregate « Innovation Leadership Network http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193832 Personal Aggregate, Filter & Connect Strategies « Aggregate « Innovation Leadership Network Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:56:12 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193832 [...] talks about it as part of personal knowledge management, Howard Jarche has discussed it as both a general model for business and for personal knowledge management (an idea that Jack Vinson picked up, and connected to the [...] [...] talks about it as part of personal knowledge management, Howard Jarche has discussed it as both a general model for business and for personal knowledge management (an idea that Jack Vinson picked up, and connected to the [...]

]]> By: Paul Simbeck-Hampson http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193713 Paul Simbeck-Hampson Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:12:16 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193713 It's a done deal then when those stats from Mr Kelley are correct. Social is the way only way forward and sharing is the name of the game. I can now see clearly why some very rigid hierarchical institutions are feeling the fear - knowledge shared, power squared. 20 years ago, the upper management had the information and therefore the power, now that everyone has the information available in multiple streams, the role of upper management changes from deliver of content to facilitator and coach - a paradigm shifting phenomenon. :-) It’s a done deal then when those stats from Mr Kelley are correct. Social is the way only way forward and sharing is the name of the game. I can now see clearly why some very rigid hierarchical institutions are feeling the fear – knowledge shared, power squared.

20 years ago, the upper management had the information and therefore the power, now that everyone has the information available in multiple streams, the role of upper management changes from deliver of content to facilitator and coach – a paradigm shifting phenomenon. :-)

]]> By: Harold Jarche http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193711 Harold Jarche Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:48:19 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193711 <blockquote><em>However the knowledge hoarding model begins to fail when it becomes cheap and easy to share and when the knowledge required to complete a task exceeds an individual's capability to learn in the time available. This has been reflected in a longitudinal study of knowledge workers that Robert Kelley of Carnegie-Mellon University conducted over more than twenty years. He asked professionals "What percentage of the knowledge you need to do your job is stored in your own mind?" In 1986 the answer was typically about 75%. By 1997 workers estimated that they had only about 15% to 20% of the knowledge needed in their own mind. Kelley estimated that by 2006 the answer was only 8% to 10%. Given that professionals now need to draw 90% or more of the knowledge they need to do their jobs from others, in my view 'Knowledge equals Power' is no longer true. I believe it is now more accurate to state Knowledge Shared equals Power Squared.</em></blockquote> Source: http://egovau.blogspot.com/2009/11/knowledge-shared-equals-power-squared.html

However the knowledge hoarding model begins to fail when it becomes cheap and easy to share and when the knowledge required to complete a task exceeds an individual’s capability to learn in the time available.

This has been reflected in a longitudinal study of knowledge workers that Robert Kelley of Carnegie-Mellon University conducted over more than twenty years. He asked professionals “What percentage of the knowledge you need to do your job is stored in your own mind?”

In 1986 the answer was typically about 75%. By 1997 workers estimated that they had only about 15% to 20% of the knowledge needed in their own mind. Kelley estimated that by 2006 the answer was only 8% to 10%.

Given that professionals now need to draw 90% or more of the knowledge they need to do their jobs from others, in my view ‘Knowledge equals Power’ is no longer true.

I believe it is now more accurate to state Knowledge Shared equals Power Squared.

Source: http://egovau.blogspot.com/2009/11/knowledge-shared-equals-power-squared.html

]]> By: Paul Simbeck-Hampson http://www.jarche.com/2010/01/the-business-of-information/comment-page-1/#comment-193710 Paul Simbeck-Hampson Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:18:33 +0000 http://www.jarche.com/?p=3301#comment-193710 Hi Harold, In reference to this point (slide 28)... Volume: "We cannot master all the knowledge needed for our work." So what we (businesses/organisations) really need to do is get on with the process of "social" in order to fill the knowledge gaps, reduce hierarchy control, invite tacit communication while adopting a variety of innovative flexible techniques and technologies. Sounds easy enough... ;-) I like this quote by M.C. Richards "A knowledge of the path cannot be substituted for putting one foot in front of the other." Thanks for the inspiration (again), also to @oldaily @jon :-) Hi Harold,
In reference to this point (slide 28)…

Volume: “We cannot master all the knowledge needed for our work.”

So what we (businesses/organisations) really need to do is get on with the process of “social” in order to fill the knowledge gaps, reduce hierarchy control, invite tacit communication while adopting a variety of innovative flexible techniques and technologies. Sounds easy enough… ;-)

I like this quote by M.C. Richards

“A knowledge of the path cannot be substituted for putting one foot in front of the other.”

Thanks for the inspiration (again), also to @oldaily @jon :-)

]]>