Definitions of knowledge vary greatly. Some are simple, such as “specific information about something” (American Heritage Dictionary). Some are more complex and begin to bring in other elements such as understanding and awareness of objects such as facts, data, and information. There is the question of how knowledge can be gathered or created. And then there is the whole question of what is the value of knowledge if it can’t be applied—which brings us to the need for such topics as knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer.
Philosophers have debated the nature and meaning of knowledge all the way back to Plato and Aristotle. Not being a philosopher myself, I am not able to enter that debate. However, coming from the perspective of helping adults learn and acquire knowledge, I believe that knowledge provides a foundational building block upon which higher-level skills and thinking can flourish. Knowledge can come in many forms (data, information, stories, or even learned physical responses such as that possessed by a surgeon or dancer). Knowledge can be easy to access and well defined (explicit) or it can be elusive and hard to capture (tacit). And, beautifully, knowledge can grow and be the basis of future innovation.
As a doctoral student in Knowledge Management, my own definition of knowledge is evolving and I’ll share its continuing evolution within this blog. For now, I present one definition that comes from the classic Knowledge Management text, Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. In the first chapter of this book, Davenport and Prusak themselves work to define knowledge. They introduce the concepts of data versus information versus knowledge and then present the following definition of knowledge:
“Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, if often becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms.” (Davenport & Prusak, 2000, p. 5)
Having a definition such as this will be helpful as we explore how knowledge, learning, and performance are intertwined. Key ideas in Davenport and Prusak’s definition that are important to point out include the concepts of fluidity or the ever-changing nature of knowledge and how it is often embedded in hard-to-reach places such as “the minds of knowers” and within “organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms.” These two concepts in particular point to the challenges of working with knowledge—it is ever changing and often difficult to access.
However, I believe that by tapping into—or helping individuals and organizations learn ways to tap into their—knowledge in a systematic way, true innovation occurs and maximum potential can be realized. So for my working definition of knowledge, I will say that knowledge feeds learning, learning provides an environment that enables the learner to not only acquire knowledge but also create new knowledge, and performance is the result of what happens when knowledge and learning work in concert with one another. Let us see how this working definition evolves in the coming months and years as I continue my doctoral studies.
References:
Davenport, T., & Prusak, L. (2000). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know (Paperback ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press. (Original work published 1998)
Knowledge. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved July 27, 2007, from Answers.com Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/knowledge
- Robin
Copyright Robin Donnan 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Performance Associates, Inc.
