how is knowledge different than information
One of the most important aspects regarding knowledge management (KM), both as theoretical endeavor and practice, appears to pertain to the question what is it that is being managed. Or, we can better ask ourselves as to what do various authors mean when referring to KM. What’s in the name?
In order to differentiate KM from information and data management it needs to be shown that knowledge is different than data and information. Blair’s (2002) explication that knowledge is different than data and information is based on the information theory stratification which puts data as the raw thing, then information which means data arranged in a certain way that presents and brings forth an obvious interpretable meaning, and then knowledge as the next level up, mainly stating that knowledge, exhibited through it characteristics, is different because it resides in peoples minds and it is not tangible (p. 1020). McInerney (2002) also presents the information theory viewpoint of knowledge: “in information theory, knowledge has been distinguished by its place on a hierarchical ladder that locates data on the bottom rung, the next belonging to information, then knowledge, and finally wisdom at the top” (p. 1010).
It appears that this kind of placement of knowledge fits better with KM as practice since it distinguishes information-as-thing to be something tangible. However, if we look at Brookes’s (1980) elaborations regarding ‘information’, he defines information as a "small bit of knowledge” and “knowledge as a structure of concepts linked by their relationship and information as a small part of such structure” (p. 131).
There does not seem to be a necessity to explain why information is different than knowledge, for both Blair and McInerney could have proceeded with their arguments in the articles by showing that knowledge is not a tangible (in physical sense) thing. An argument for the necessity to differentiate knowledge from information in such terms appears to respond to a need to clearly and unambiguously distinguish knowledge management from information and document management (Blair, p. 1019), perhaps more so for KM practitioners.
Related:
Actor-Network Theory and Managing Knowledge
References:
Blair, D.C. (2002). Knowledge Management: Hype, Hope, or Help? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, (12) 1019-1028
Brookes, B.C. (1980). The foundation of information science. Part I. Philosophical aspects. Journal of Information Science 2, 125-133
McInerney, C. (2002). Knowledge Management and the Dynamic Nature of Knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, (12) 1009-1018
- knowlege exosomatically independent ?! - Jun 17, 2003
- The Understanding of ‘Information’ and Information Science - Jun 17, 2003
- objective knowledge: its degree of permanence - Jun 17, 2003
- information: conveyor of ideas, thoughts, concepts and knowledge - Jun 17, 2003
- Information Literacy - Jun 12, 2003
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: how is knowledge different than information.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.kmentor.com/mtcgi/mt-tb.cgi/55

Leave a comment