Knowledge Management Concept: Emerging Perspectives

by Mohammad Qasim [ United Nations Development Programme Mine Action Team ]

The importance of understanding what knowledge management is leads to a lengthy discussion of the differences among data, information, knowledge and wisdom. The conclusion of these philosophical musings is then applied to making informed and thoughtful decisions when dealing with a situation.

Knowledge management is both a strategy, driven by customer needs, and an infrastructure, shaped by technology, for handling and distributing information. It crosses disciplinary and administrative boundaries. Knowledge management in mine action is becoming more important not only for awareness, planning, prioritization and operational use but also for decision making at a senior-management level. Authorities should use knowledge management to learn, address and solve the landmine problem efficiently, effectively, economically and in a timely manner.

I will explain the stages of knowledge management in the particular context of mine action—how the knowledge should be managed, handled, used and finally understood in a systematic approach. I have related different theories to better convey my thoughts on this.

Knowledge management is a hot topic today. What is this activity called knowledge management, and why is it so important to each and every one of us? The following paragraphs offer some emerging perspectives in response to these questions. As you read on, you can determine the importance of the proper use of information to gain knowledge, which I believe then leads to wisdom.

Developing a Context

Like water, the rising wave of data can be viewed as an abundant, vital and necessary resource. With enough preparation, we should be able to tap into that reservoir—and ride the wave—by utilizing new ways to channel raw data into meaningful information. That information, in turn, can become the knowledge that leads to wisdom.

Figure 1
Caption: Understanding information leads to creating knowledge and subsequently to developing wisdom. Graphic courtesy of author/MAIC.

Before attempting to address the question of knowledge management, it is appropriate to develop some perspective regarding what knowledge really is. Let's assume:

The idea is that information, knowledge and wisdom are more than just collections; rather, the whole represents more than the sum of its parts and has a synergy of its own.

We begin with data, which is just information at a meaningless point in space and time, without reference to either space or time. When we encounter a piece of data, if it gets our attention at all, our first action is usually to attempt to find a way to attribute meaning to it. We do this by associating it with other things. If I see the number five, I can immediately associate it with cardinal numbers and relate it to being greater than four and less than six, whether this was implied by this particular instance or not. If I see a single word, such as time, there is a tendency to immediately form associations with previous contexts within which I have found time to be meaningful. This might include "being on time," "a stitch in time saves nine," "time never stops," etc. The implication here is that when there is no context, there is little or no meaning. So, we create context and it fabricates meaning.

The idea that a collection of data is not information implies that there must be a relationship between the data for it to become information. The pieces of data may represent information, yet whether or not it is information depends on the understanding of the one perceiving the data.

While information involves an understanding of the relationship between data, it generally does not provide a foundation for why the data is what it is, nor an indication as to how the data is likely to change over time. Quite simply, it is what it is, with great dependence on context for its meaning and with little implication for the future.

Beyond relation there is pattern, where pattern is more than simply a relation of relations. Pattern embodies both a consistency and completeness of relations, which, to an extent, creates its own context. Pattern also serves as a model repeatability and predictability both implied.

When a pattern relation exists between the data and information, the pattern has the potential to represent knowledge. It only becomes knowledge, however, when one is able to realize and understand the patterns and their implications. Patterns representing knowledge have a tendency to be more self-contextualizing. That is, the pattern tends to create its own context rather than being context-dependent to the same extent that information is.

Wisdom arises when one understands the foundational principles responsible for the knowledge patterns. Wisdom, even more so than knowledge, tends to create its own context.

So, in summary the following associations can reasonably be made:

Once we have categories we can understand, this can assist us in discovering what can be managed.

Note that the sequence data→information→knowledge→wisdom represents a growing range. That is, although data is a separate entity, the progression to information, to knowledge, and finally to wisdom does not necessarily occur in different stages of development. One progresses as one's understanding develops. Everything is relative, and one can have partial understanding of the relations that represent information, partial understanding of the patterns that represent knowledge, and partial understanding of the principles that are the foundation of wisdom.

People learn by connecting new information to patterns that they already understand. In doing so, they extend the patterns; so, in an effort to make sense of this array, they searched for something to connect it to that already makes sense.

Knowledge Management

Yes, knowledge management is important, and I'll address reasons why shortly. But knowledge management should simply be one of many cooperating means to an end, not the end in itself, unless your job turns out to be "Corporate Knowledge Management Director" or "Chief Knowledge Officer."

Some organizations have pursued total quality management or reengineering, not in support of what they are trying to accomplish, but as ends in and of themselves because they simply don't know what they are really trying to accomplish. As such, knowledge management, and everything else for that matter, is important only to the extent that it enhances an organization's ability and capacity to deal with, and develop in, the four dimensions listed below. Thus, we should consider the following:

The Value of Knowledge Management

In an organizational context, data represents facts or values of results, and relations between data and other relations have the capacity to represent information. Patterns of relations of data and information and other patterns have the capacity to represent knowledge. Yet what is the real value of information and knowledge, and what does it mean to manage it?

Without associations we have little chance of understanding anything. We understand things based on the associations we are able to differentiate. If someone says that a landmine clearance rate started at 10 square kilometers (3.94 square miles) per quarter and has been rising 20 percent per quarter for the last four quarters, I am somewhat confident that the clearance rate now is about 20.7 square kilometers (8 square miles) per quarter. I am confident because I know what "rising 20 percent per quarter" means, and I can do the math.

Yet if someone asks what clearance rates are appropriate for the next quarter, I would have to say, "It depends!" Trying to predict future success is a trap that many fall into, because they don't understand that data doesn't predict trends of data. What predicts trends of data is the activity that is responsible for the data.

In this example what needs to be managed to create value is the data that defines past results, the data and information associated with the organization and its competition, and the patterns of activity that relate all these items to enable a reliable level of predictability of the future. What I would refer to as knowledge management would be the capture, retention and reuse of the foundation for conveying an understanding of how all these pieces fit together and how to communicate them meaningfully to some other person.

Conclusion

The value of knowledge management relates directly to the effectiveness with which the managed knowledge enables the members of the organization to deal with today's situations and effectively envision and create their future. Without on-demand access to managed knowledge, every situation is addressed based on what the individual or group brings to the situation. With on-demand access to managed knowledge, every situation is addressed with the sum total of everything anyone in the organization has ever learned about a situation of a similar nature. Which approach do you think would make a more effective organization? Bullet

Biography

Mohammad Qasim is an Afghan citizen working with UNDP Mine Action Team in Angola as Management Information Systems Advisor/Deputy Chief Technical Advisor. He has more than 10 years of experience in mine-action information management and global information systems, both with U.N. agencies and nongovernmental organizations. He holds a master's degree in information management and a bachelor's degree in computer science.

Contact Information

Mohammad Qasim
MIS Advisor/Deputy CTA
UNDP Mine Action Team
Rua Major Kanhangulo 197, C.P. 910
Luanda / Angola
E-mail: mohammad.qasim@undp.org