Response to what Eelco Kruizinga said in LO5272
> Forever do:
do's deleted
> Each of steps could be operationalised in specific organisations by
> methods (e.g. step 1 might make use of the method of organising regular
> internal symposia, methods that are in use in social science, assigning
> special knowledge facilitator that go around the company finding knowledge
> [I remember Roger Schank, an artificial Intelligence guru, saying that he
> employs what he calls knowledge indexers]; tools that support these
> methods might be e-discussion lists, TQM idea boxes, databases, process
> logs,...)
What most caught my attention here is the "knowledge facilitator that goes
around the company finding knowledge" and indexing it.
Sounds like WWW work, at least from my temporal perspective :)
In my immediate work environment, development work for the WWW has been
both my desired goal and also what I have not been allowed to do as a work
effort. The dynamics of the equation that include whatever ability, sense
of opportunity, need, and mutual benefit, and personal hopes and
application seems to me to emit a great cry; I won't go further into it,
except to say that I have believed and still believe that the web is not
the place for dirty laundery, not if we want others to benefit from it.
That concept was derived from postings in a local laundromat that is
managed by the WEB laundery company :) Sorry for the spelling of laundery.
In a different context, an administrator where I work said of some process
- don't remember exactly what - that people would eventually insist that
they have it. I applied that phrase to knowledge management and knowledge
presentation that makes finding and understanding easier. Understood that
we're usually not free to understand whatever we hear however we want to.
The problem that appears in the context of thinking is that it is not
clearly convenient to let the "paid staff" advance without bound. The
problem with that is that some advances will only occur whereever in a
mind they occur, and some attitudes of "professionalism" and its implied
past expenses of education and study may intrinsically be resistant to
that. If professionalism is intended to personally ensure high employment
above those who are not professionals, that seems to be resistance to
knowledge when it appears "whereever it does".
Dr. Deming said, knowledge knows no borders. So it behooves us to let the
disciplines of learning be strengthened as used abilities typically
increase. Another pleasant interpretation of potential conflict is that
expertise is truly that. Whereever a worker, professional as well as
non-professional, has applied themself to their task and "done their job",
they learn the description of their task as it really is and can describe
it as easily as someone can provide directions to their house from the
north, south, east, or west. Others who have not done THAT job, will
probably not describe the particulars of the job as well.
-- Have a nice day John Paul Fullerton jpf6745@acs.tamu.edu