Difference between revisions of "Knowledge"
From NKM WIKIDOC
(→Description) |
(→Related articles) |
||
| (33 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <!-- | ||
{{JohnD}} | {{JohnD}} | ||
| − | {{ | + | |
| + | {{Tidy3}}, | ||
{{Consolidation stage}}, | {{Consolidation stage}}, | ||
| Line 6: | Line 8: | ||
{{Priority}}, | {{Priority}}, | ||
| − | {{Foundation}} | + | {{Foundation}} |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| − | + | :''For the HR paradigm definition of Knowledge see [[Knowledge (HR)]]'' | |
| + | --> | ||
==Definition== | ==Definition== | ||
| + | {{ {{PAGENAME}} }} | ||
| − | + | <i>Note1:</i> Knowledge is a combination of ‘knowing facts’ about and ‘knowing how’ to do something. It refers to a body of facts and principles accumulated by humankind over the course of time. It is distinct from information as knowledge is information that has a purpose or use. Data leads to information and information leads to knowledge. Knowledge confers a capacity for effective action. | |
| − | + | <i>Note2:</i> The draft version of ISO 9001E 2014 defines knowledge as available collection of information (3.50) being a justified belief and having a high certainty to be true. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
==Description== | ==Description== | ||
[[File:Definitions of knowledge.PNG|thumb|right|500px|Table 1. Definitions of knowledge]] | [[File:Definitions of knowledge.PNG|thumb|right|500px|Table 1. Definitions of knowledge]] | ||
Since the time of the earliest philosophers men and women have attempted to both understand and define the concept of knowledge, however, no single definition of knowledge exists that has been generally agreed upon. | Since the time of the earliest philosophers men and women have attempted to both understand and define the concept of knowledge, however, no single definition of knowledge exists that has been generally agreed upon. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The many aspects of this fundamental topic are well covered in the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge). | ||
| + | |||
Table 1 shows some of the definitions: | Table 1 shows some of the definitions: | ||
| − | Knowledge has many dimensions | + | For example from this table we can see that Davenport and Prusak define knowledge as, "a fluid mix of framed experience, contextual information, values and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information." Knowledge by this definition therefore includes skills [1]. In the HR paradigm, there is a different definition of knowledge used by HR professionals that excludes skills from the definition of knowledge. |
| + | |||
| + | Knowledge has many dimensions: | ||
In the same way that an automotive vehicle may be described in terms of many dimensions such as: | In the same way that an automotive vehicle may be described in terms of many dimensions such as: | ||
| Line 38: | Line 48: | ||
# Artefacts – Buildings, tools, equipment, etc. | # Artefacts – Buildings, tools, equipment, etc. | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | '''Knowledge models:''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | Many knowledge exist that refer to these different dimensions. Knowledge models are described in [[Knowledge model | this article]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- content integrated into the articel "Knowledge Model" | ||
====Know-why,know-how,know-what knowledge model==== | ====Know-why,know-how,know-what knowledge model==== | ||
=====Description===== | =====Description===== | ||
| Line 67: | Line 82: | ||
All knowledge can be subdivided onto knowledge domains. Each is the content of a particular field or area of knowledge. In knowledge management domains are often defined by the scope of [[Communities of practice]], [[Taxonomy|taxonomies]] or [[Educational courses]] and are useful subdivisions of knowledge into which to organise knowledge repositories. | All knowledge can be subdivided onto knowledge domains. Each is the content of a particular field or area of knowledge. In knowledge management domains are often defined by the scope of [[Communities of practice]], [[Taxonomy|taxonomies]] or [[Educational courses]] and are useful subdivisions of knowledge into which to organise knowledge repositories. | ||
=====Example===== | =====Example===== | ||
| − | At a macro scale, examples of domains might be Chemistry, Physics, Biology or at a smaller scale the domain of Physics may be subdivided into many more domains such as Classical Mechanics, Electricity and Magnetism, Modern Physics, Optics, Thermodynamics etc. | + | At a macro scale, examples of domains might be Chemistry, Physics, Biology or at a smaller scale the domain of Physics may be subdivided into many more domains such as Classical Mechanics, Electricity and Magnetism, Modern Physics, Optics, Thermodynamics etc. A list of nuclear knowledge domains can be found in [[List of nuclear knowledge domains]]. |
=====Practical application in KM===== | =====Practical application in KM===== | ||
Practical tools for managing domains include [[Ontology|ontolgies]] which describe knowledge of a specific domain through concepts in their relation to other concepts. | Practical tools for managing domains include [[Ontology|ontolgies]] which describe knowledge of a specific domain through concepts in their relation to other concepts. | ||
| + | |||
===Explicit,implicit,tacit knowledge model=== | ===Explicit,implicit,tacit knowledge model=== | ||
=====Description===== | =====Description===== | ||
[[File:Knowledge-Iceberg-Model.jpg|thumb|right|500px|Fig 3. The Iceberg model of tacit and explicit knowledge]] | [[File:Knowledge-Iceberg-Model.jpg|thumb|right|500px|Fig 3. The Iceberg model of tacit and explicit knowledge]] | ||
It is useful to identify three types of knowledge: [[Explicit knowledge |Explicit]], [[Tacit knowledge |tacit]] and [[Implicit knowledge |implicit]]. Each requires different approaches to its management. The model is often illustrated with reference to an iceberg (Fig. 3.) | It is useful to identify three types of knowledge: [[Explicit knowledge |Explicit]], [[Tacit knowledge |tacit]] and [[Implicit knowledge |implicit]]. Each requires different approaches to its management. The model is often illustrated with reference to an iceberg (Fig. 3.) | ||
| − | + | * [[Explicit knowledge |Explicit]] is {{Explicit knowledge}} | |
| − | + | * [[Implicit knowledge |Implicit]] is {{Implicit knowledge}} | |
| − | + | * [[Tacit knowledge |Tacit]] is {{Tacit knowledge}} | |
| + | |||
=====Example===== | =====Example===== | ||
Much of what can be descirbe for the swimming example above under the "know-why,know-how,know-what" model can also be said of this model, where Tacit knowledge is broadly equivalent to know-how and explicit knowledge is equivalent to know-what. | Much of what can be descirbe for the swimming example above under the "know-why,know-how,know-what" model can also be said of this model, where Tacit knowledge is broadly equivalent to know-how and explicit knowledge is equivalent to know-what. | ||
| Line 82: | Line 99: | ||
=====Practical application in KM===== | =====Practical application in KM===== | ||
A corollary to the model is that usually only part of the explicit knowledge is codified and thus represents an opportunity for knowledge [[Capture|capture]]. | A corollary to the model is that usually only part of the explicit knowledge is codified and thus represents an opportunity for knowledge [[Capture|capture]]. | ||
| + | --> | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
| − | [1] | + | [1] DAVENPORT, T.H., PRUSAK, L., Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA (2000). |
| − | |||
| − | + | ==Related articles== | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[Data]] | [[Data]] | ||
| Line 106: | Line 118: | ||
[[Explicit knowledge]] | [[Explicit knowledge]] | ||
| − | [[ | + | [[Knowledge lifecycle]] |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | [[ | + | [[Template:Know-why |Know-why]] |
| − | [[ | + | [[Template:Know-how |Know-how]] |
| − | [[ | + | [[Template:Know-what |Know-what]] |
| − | |||
[[Category:Knowledge]] | [[Category:Knowledge]] | ||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 13:53, 7 March 2016
Definition
A mix of experiences, values, contextual information and expert insight for acquiring, understanding and interpreting information. Together with attitudes and skills, it forms a capacity for effective actions.
Note1: Knowledge is a combination of ‘knowing facts’ about and ‘knowing how’ to do something. It refers to a body of facts and principles accumulated by humankind over the course of time. It is distinct from information as knowledge is information that has a purpose or use. Data leads to information and information leads to knowledge. Knowledge confers a capacity for effective action.
Note2: The draft version of ISO 9001E 2014 defines knowledge as available collection of information (3.50) being a justified belief and having a high certainty to be true.
Description
Since the time of the earliest philosophers men and women have attempted to both understand and define the concept of knowledge, however, no single definition of knowledge exists that has been generally agreed upon.
The many aspects of this fundamental topic are well covered in the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge).
Table 1 shows some of the definitions:
For example from this table we can see that Davenport and Prusak define knowledge as, "a fluid mix of framed experience, contextual information, values and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information." Knowledge by this definition therefore includes skills [1]. In the HR paradigm, there is a different definition of knowledge used by HR professionals that excludes skills from the definition of knowledge.
Knowledge has many dimensions:
In the same way that an automotive vehicle may be described in terms of many dimensions such as:
- Materials: Metal, Rubber, Glass etc.
- Components: Wheels, Engine, Passenger compartment, etc.
- Colours : Black, Red, Grey etc.
So also can Knowledge be described in terms of a number of different dimensions such as:
- Domains – technical, organisational, societal etc.
- States – Explicit, implicit, tacit etc.
- Levels – Know-why, know-how, know-what etc.
- Representations – Documents, models, pictures etc.
- Categories – Good practices, lessons, standards etc.
- Artefacts – Buildings, tools, equipment, etc.
Knowledge models:
Many knowledge exist that refer to these different dimensions. Knowledge models are described in this article.
References
[1] DAVENPORT, T.H., PRUSAK, L., Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA (2000).
