Knowledge Management Models or Models of Knowledge? A Critical Review of the Literature . A presentation given to the actKM 2006 conference Research Forum stream.

What is a Model?

A model is an intellectual construct in artefact form that provides an abstract, highly formalised, often visual, yet simplified representation of a phenomenon and its interactions (Coffey & Atkinson 1996; Despres & Chauvel 2000). Broadly there are three types of model: mathematical models, descriptive models, and graphical models (Satzinger, Jackson & Burd 2000). Mathematical models explain the technical aspects of a system and can be either prescriptive or predictive (Miller 2006; Ragsdale 1998). Descriptive models are narrative in form and often use symbolic or mathematic elements to aid understanding. Descriptive models are rarely predictive, but can be prescriptive. Graphic models use diagrams and symbols to illustrate simple and complex relationships. They can be predictive or prescriptive. Typically a model only includes those variables that are sufficient to represent the phenomena in question. For example if colour is irrelevant then the model will not, and should not, include it as a variable. However these simplifications may result in prediction and description errors if not considered carefully. Accordingly all models should be treated with caution. They are useful so long as the underlying assumptions are explicit, and it is recognised that they are an abstract representation of reality that may, or may not, be objective (McAdam & McCreedy 1999, p. 94). Models in the social sciences tend to be descriptive and graphical rather than mathematical, although mathematical models have their place. In the knowledge management literature almost all models are descriptive and graphical.

read more ...

A model is an intellectual construct in artefact form that provides an abstract, highly formalised, often visual, yet simplified representation of a phenomenon and its interactions.

Coffey & Atkinson

A simple model which I find useful is the “Six Knows Knowledge Model ” shown below. The model has its origins in the Rudyard Kipling poem “I Keep Six Honest Serving-Men ” , but no doubt I will be challenged on this assertion! That said it is a model that serves me well, except I would add ‘know how much’ as a node.

Now Dan Roam , quite independently of me, has enhanced the usefulness of the model by introducing a visual thinking element to it - he's also picked up on the how much dimension. Have a look at this presentation , but in particular slide seven (the preceding slides give some background and explanation). What I really like is the ability to add some discipline and consistency to my mind-mapping and rich pictures. With just six icons I can now draw the essence of a problem or a solution. Sure the devil is in the detail, but if nothing else this exercise aids clarity and helps to get to common understanding and shared meaning. ...

read more ...

It seems to me that knowledge management suffers from 4-pane achromatopsia. What the hell are you talking about I hear you say! Well achromatopsia is a congenital vision disorder characterised by complete colour-blindness, central visual acuity loss, extreme light sensitivity, and rapid involuntary eye wobble. To put it another way the unfortunate individuals with achromatopsia have a limited field of vision, have great difficulty keeping focus, and wear dark glasses most of the time which further restricts their vision.

What do I mean by 4-pane? It seems to me we have a love affair with quadrant models. Just have a poke around the web and look at the various models. Beginning in the 1950’s we have Johari Windows and the Prisoner’s Dilemma models – the first designed as diagnostic to understand interpersonal communication and relationships, and the second to understand behaviour, decision-making and strategy. In the 1960’s we have Blake and Moutons’ Managerial Grid , which uses four panes to explain leadership styles. If we jump forward to the 1990’s we have Goffee and Jones’ Corporate Culture Model, where corporate culture is measured on solidarity and sociability axes. The result is a 4-pane window where corporate culture is classified as fragmented, networked, communal and mercenary.

To bring the discussion right into the knowledge management world, we must include Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi famous SECI Model – socialisation, externalisation, combination, and internalisation. ...

read more ...

About three years ago I came up with the idea of the “Knowledge Conduit”. The idea is still a bit raw but I thought I would share it with you anyway. The Knowledge Conduit is illustrated below.

First, you should observe that there are two distinct domains – the descriptive domain and the predictive domain – and that data and information belong to the descriptive domain. I like Davenport and Prusaks’ (1998, pp 2-3) definition of data as being "a set of discrete, objective facts existing in symbolic form that have not been interpreted". The symbolic form may be text, images, or pre-processed code. Data is usually organised into structured records, however it lacks context. The declaration ‘Iron melts at 1,538 degrees Celsius.’ is a data statement because it has no context.

read more ...

There is a good deal of criticism of the data, information, knowledge, wisdom model of knowledge, which is sometimes called the DIKW hierarchy but I prefer to call it the ‘pyramid to wisdom’. Most of the criticism says the model is too simple. I wonder, however, if the model has some use. As usual it is useful to return to source documents.

In knowledge management circles Russell Ackoff is usually credited as the originator of the hierarchy, and indeed published two seminal papers, the first in 1989. However Milan Zeleny published a paper two years before Ackoff, and Harlan Cleveland published a paper in 1982. Both of these authors mention the hierarchy and provide examples. ...

read more ...