Gina once again thank you for a considered response.  I think there is much sloppy thinking and poor use of terms, to the point where knowledge management as a term is content free!  That said I think you are on the path to capturing the objective or intent of knowledge management.  I note your "definition" is inclusive by ommission - you don't specify people, process, technology or content as components.  In my experience effeciency and effectiveness compete, and there is an inevitable tradeoff (I might blog about that in the coming days).

I like the idea of dynamic mapping and its diagnostic intent. I have tried to achieve this with my business network analysis albeit at the moment it is static - see my Deconstructing Complexity post.  I think this example shows it is possible to work out what it is that we need to know. Perhaps that is the real essence of knowledge management?

Regards Graham