Kevin Werbach, the editor of Esther Dyson's Release
1.0 (http://release1.edventure.com/), wrote an
excellent issue on Knowledge Management that's much
in accord with what we've been blathering on about.
Further, he says he's writing about "Post Modern KM"
and we here at JOHO are such suckers for anything
POMO that we once paid a guy at eBay an extra $25
because he offered to say the uninterruptible power
supply we'd bought was in fact post-modern. So, we
put the question to Kevin:
Q: What is postmodern knowledge management?
A: Knowledge management has traditionally suffered
from the hubris of modernism: the belief that we
can discover ultimate truths and organize the
world according to rational principles using
clever code. The idea was that we should capture
and organize bits of "knowledge" in central
databases. The people involved were relevant only
as donors to the common ontology or as empty
vessels into which knowledge could be poured.
Life -- and business -- doesn't work that way.
It's messy, complex and subjective. Real workers
have the disturbing habit of being human, so they
refuse to change their behavior or to contribute
metadata into a shared pool. And universal
taxonomies are worthless if divorced from the
subjective experience of those who use or generate
that information.
Enter postmodern knowledge management.
Postmodernism holds that our concept of reality is
always warped by the lenses of individual
subjectivity and group power dynamics. Therefore,
postmodern KM can't be about management at all,
because management implies external control of
some definable resource. Its goal is simpler yet
deeper: leveraging people. Postmodern KM operates
within and on the basis of existing behavior
patterns, mining conversation streams and
relationships automatically to incorporate
structure and context into the information human
users already manipulate. It fosters human
intelligence and interaction rather than trying to
replace them.
Concretely, that means things like automatically
parsing email messages and other internal content
to draw out useful context and associations (an
approach being pursued by Lotus and a bevy of
startups including Tacit Knowledge Systems,
Abridge, EcoCap, Krypteian and Neomeo); mining
discussion content and user feedback on intranets
(Newknow); adding workflow directly into email
messages (Zaplet); and building on Weblogs as a
powerful Web- native tool for knowledge sharing
(Onclave and Slashdot derivatives). In other
words, tools to help knowledge manage itself.
Excellent thoughts. We have nothing to disagree
with, damn him! So, rather than standing mute in
admiration, let's get POMO on Kevin's ass. And the
first rule of POMO analysis is to ignore the
content. Content is so Enlightenment, dude! Then you
pick on a trivial word that shows through a series
of puns (excuse, me semantic archaeology) that the
writer has been blinded by his own language,
reinforcing whatever patriarchal, sexual oppression
you choose to attribute to him. For example,
Werbach's use of "mining" betrays that he is "mine-
ing" (possessing, capitalism) the underground
explosives (mining) that are hidden by their own
hiddenness until they rapidly deconstruct whatever
has the misfortune of tripping (a rapid exposure of
the nihil (pluribus) of the unum and an
hallucinogenic delusion, de-lude, de- play) them.
Werbach is clearly "mining" his own business
(private self self-referentially or self-
reverentially defining itself by its own otherness)
when he "minds" (mines) what is known (no one) to no
one (known) and what no one (gnome, Gnostic) knows
(no's, negates, B. Gates, billingsgate, nonsense,
non-scents, bodily excrescence known gnomically only
through the non-sense of knowing garden gnome). In
short, Werbach's own sexual knowing is mined (mind,
mynah) and, therefore, we are led ineluctably (luce,
light, lux, deluxe, bourgeois) to the conclusion
(conk loose shun, words of release and bondage) that
Werbach is an acid-head pomosexual who wants to have
sex with mynahs and -- the real point of POMO
criticism -- I am smarter than he. QED.
[Note: I've collected my writings on KM at:
http://www.hyperorg.com/misc/hyperkm.html]
Printer Friendly Version
The Author
David Weinberger writes JOHO and is one of the Ringleaders of cluetrain.com,
a manifesto of web ethics. He also provides strategic marketing
consulting to high-tech companies, writes for several magazines
(including Wired)
and is a commentator on NPR's "All Things Considered."
He was, as VP of Strategic Marketing, one of the shapers of Open
Text's intranet strategy. David sits on several conference boards
and is a member of AIIM's Emerging Technology Advisory Group. Reach
him at self@evident.com
.