According to Weinberger (2011)
“Traditional knowledge is what you get when paper is the medium” (p. 45). Yet, Weinberger proceeds to emphasize that in
a networked world, knowledge lives not in books or in the heads but in the
network itself (Weinberger, 2011). We
have went from reading sharing knowledge on a college campus or another venue within
close proximity limited by geographic location.
To a world where knowledge can be shared with those not only across the
country, but across the world. Therefore,
we now have the “wisdom of crowds,” or a collection of people that share
knowledge. So, according to Weinberger
(2011) the net enables expertise to emerge not only because so many people are
connected to it, but also because those people are different from one another
in how they think and what they know.
What emerges then is a network of experts that function in a room where
the smartest person is the room itself (Weinberger, 2011). However, who is to say that the room is full
of experts? If you leave a room open to
anybody to enter, can it not be diluted, therefore, discounting the knowledge
that is shared? According to Friedman, Wikipedia
is a prime example of this “where millions of people worldwide visit daily for
a quick reference ‘facts,’ composed and posted by people with no special
expertise or knowledge—and sometimes by people with malice (p. 124).
I agree then with Davenport (2015) that “knowledge management” isn’t
dead, but it’s gasping for breath. As
Carr (2010) put it, “The linking, blinking twittering diversity of the Net is
making us dumb. The Web is reshaping our
physical brains, weakening our capabilities for the kind of ‘deep processing’
that underpins ‘mindful knowledge acquisition, inductive analysis, critical
thinking, imagination, and reflection (p. 139).” In other words, there is a mixed message,
Davenport concludes that knowledge management barely has a pulse, because it is
no longer a trend or rarely navigated to online. Yet, Carr suggests that maybe our ability to
critically think is being somewhat crippled by our over reliance on the
web. In this case we should look at the “digital
natives” that grew up with technology, is their capacity to think critically
and acquire knowledge greatly superior to the “digital immigrants,” or my
generation that is learning technology at its later stages? I am not sure, I think those “digital natives,”
have been blessed with a different set of skills, not sure if critically
thinking and acquisition of knowledge is superior than my generation, I
personally do not think so!
In closing as far as leadership in the realm of knowledge management is
concerned, it has been impacted greatly by both the web and the erosion of
cognitive authority. First, with the emergence
of the web experts or not, are able to voice their opinions about anything,
therefore, making it difficult where to go for reliable information. Dixon (2009) proceed to explain the erosion
of cognitive authority, that is, the reduction in the belief that those in
authority have some expertise or knowledge that we can trust. Reasons for this erosion are in the field of
medicine with the increased awareness of medical errors or the sex scandals in
the Catholic Church. No field is immune
to this erosion; politicians who break public trust and those we trust with our
money, like Bernie Madoff. In other
words, who are we to believe? Who really
are the experts? Who can we trust?
So, I do think organizations, leaders, have to innovate and at times reinvent
themselves or follow this African proverb according to Freidman (2005);
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up.
It knows it
must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every
morning a lion wakes up.
It knows it
must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn’t
matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle.
When the
sun comes up, you better start running
(p. 137).
Or, if they do not follow this, our
leaders or corporations are like lions or gazelles that are put in zoo; “they no
longer feel the need to run.”
References
Carr,
N. 2010.
The shallows: What the internet is doing to our brains. WW Norton.
Davenport,
T. H. 2015. Whatever happened to knowledge
management? Wall Street Journal: the
CIO Report.
Dixon,
N. 2009.
Where knowledge management has been and where it is going-Part
three.
Friedman, T. L.
(2005). The world is flat. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs you might guess, I am not a big believer in Carr...and researchers are still debating his work. Doing some online searching found "...a study conducted by UCLA's Memory and Aging Research Center that had tested two groups of people between the ages of 55 and 76 years old; only one group of which were experienced web users. While they had read books or performed assigned search tasks their brain activity had been monitored with functional MRI scans, which revealed that both reading and web search utilize the same language, reading, memory, and visual regions of the brain; however, it was discovered that those searching the web stimulated additional decision-making and complex reasoning regions of the brain, with a two-fold increase in these regions in experienced web users compared with inexperienced web users."
ReplyDeleteSome see this as refuting Carr...others are not so sure.
My own take - the old days are gone...we as leaders need to determine best approaches for the new days (which are still evolving).
Chris,
ReplyDeleteIt was great reading your post because I have been haunted by the idea of knowledge management being "dead." One part of me says it is but the other says that it has the potential to be placed in an area where we all have an understanding of how it stills helps us in our daily lives. There is no other way to hammer a nail than to do it by hand. In this case, one cannot put this on the web for the world to see because this something that cannot be changed. In the case of knowledge management, placing the information that was once needed on paper, can be stored in a massive area on the web so that the network can identify this information and this data can never be diminished. It is a complex scenario because there are no filters or blockages that are managed before information is placed on the web. In higher education, I love seeing technology help students and instructors with the learning experience. It enhances how students can present the knowledge to others students in a manner that everyone can comprehend. If knowledge management dies, what term would we use? Network management? That would be a difficult task. Thanks!
This has been an interesting discussion topic. I have done so much reading over the past several years about the internet revolution and the positive impact it has had on business, education, and the social world. While I have always understood that most of the information on the web is suspect, Weinberger and Davenport provides some interesting framework for discussion on the impact the web has had on information management.
ReplyDeleteDo you feel that the information shift that has occurred is simply the ushering in of a new era or are there truly harmful consequences as a result of this altered type of information management?
I know many people that believe that the internet is actually a detriment to knowledge as Carr does, but inherent in that belief is view of knowledge in the past. They are right that kids today cannot win as much in trivial pursuit as the memorized facts they retain are less than students from a generation ago, but is that really true knowledge? Having items memorized does not increase your ability to problem solve or seek out and understand new knowledge. "Knowing" today involves more about the ability to seek out information and network with others who might have information that would be helpful and building something that is not static but rather is almost a living knowledge that continues to grow and interact with others. Regardless of perceived value of this new type of knowledge by some, it remains what the world is moving toward today and those who do not adapt the changing face of knowledge will not be able to see their way through to the future.
ReplyDeleteSpot on, Nora!
Delete