Personal knowledge management

For personal information management, see personal information management.
For personal knowledge management software, see personal knowledge base.

Personal knowledge management (PKM) is a collection of processes that a person uses to gather, classify, store, search, retrieve, and share knowledge in their daily activities (Grundspenkis 2007) and the way in which these processes support work activities (Wright 2005). It is a response to the idea that knowledge workers need to be responsible for their own growth and learning. (Smedley 2009) It is a bottom-up approach to knowledge management (KM), as opposed to more traditional, top-down KM. (Pollard 2008)

History and Background

Although as early as 1998 Davenport wrote on the importance to worker productivity of understanding individual knowledge processes (cited in (Zhang 2009)), the term personal knowledge management appears to be relatively new. Its origin can be traced in a working paper by Frand and Hixon (Frand & Hixon 1999).

PKM integrates personal information management (PIM), focused on individual skills, with knowledge management (KM) in addition to input from a variety of disciplines such as cognitive psychology, management, and philosophy (Pauleen 2009). From an organizational perspective, understanding of the field has developed in light of expanding knowledge about human cognitive capabilities and the permeability of organizational boundaries. From a metacognitive perspective, it compares various modalities within human cognition as to their competence and efficacy (Sheridan 2008). It is an underresearched area (Pauleen 2009). More recently researches have been conducted to situate personal knowledge management in the Web 2.0 and in particular trying to understand "the potential role of Web 2.0 technologies for harnessing and managing personal knowledge". (Razmerita, Kirchner & Sudzina 2009)

Models

Dorsey (2000) identified information retrieval, assessment and evaluation, organization, analysis, presentation, security, and collaboration as essential to PKM (cited in (Zhang 2009)).

Wright’s model involves four interrelated domains: analytical, information, social, and learning. The analytical domain involves competencies such as interpretation, envisioning, application, creation, and contextualization. The information dimension comprises the sourcing, assessment, organization, aggregation, and communication of information. The social dimension involves finding and collaborating with people, development of both close networks and extended networks, and dialogue. The learning dimension entails expanding pattern recognition and sensemaking capabilities, reflection, development of new knowledge, improvement of skills, and extension to others. This model stresses the importance of both bonding and bridging networks (Wright 2007).

In Nonaka and Takeuchi’s SECI model of knowledge creation (see under knowledge management), knowledge can be tacit or explicit, with the interaction of the two resulting in new knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). Smedley has developed a PKM model based on Nonaka and colleagues’ model in which an expert provides direction and a community of practice provides support for personal knowledge creation (Smedley 2009). Trust is central to knowledge sharing in this model. Nonaka has recently returned to his earlier work in an attempt to further develop his ideas about knowledge creation (Nonaka & von Krogh 2009)

Personal knowledge management can also be viewed along two main dimensions, personal knowledge and personal management (Zhang 2009). Zhang has developed a model of PKM in relation to organizational knowledge management (OKM) that considers two axes of knowledge properties and management perspectives, either organizational or personal. These aspects of organizational and personal knowledge are interconnected through the OAPI process (organizationalize, aggregate, personalize, and individualize), whereby organizational knowledge is personalized and individualized and personal knowledge is aggregated and operationalized as organizational knowledge (Zhang 2009).

Criticism

It is not clear whether PKM is anything more than a new wrapper around personal information management (PIM). William Jones argues that only personal information as tangible resource can be managed, whereas personal knowledge cannot.[1] Dave Snowden has asserted that most individuals cannot manage their knowledge in the traditional sense of "managing" and has advocated thinking in terms of sensemaking rather than PKM (Snowden & Pauleen 2008). Knowledge is not solely an individual product - that it emerges through connections, dialog and social interaction (see Sociology of knowledge). However, in Wright’s model, PKM involves the application to problem solving of analytical, information, social, and learning dimensions, which are interrelated (Wright 2007), and so is inherently social.

An aim of PKM is "helping individuals to be more effective in personal, organisational and social environments" ((Pauleen 2009), p. 221), often through the use of technology such as networking software. It has been argued, however, that equation of PKM with technology has limited the value and utility of the concept (e.g., (Pollard 2008)(Snowden & Pauleen 2008)).

Skills

Skills associated with personal knowledge management.

Tools

Some organizations are introducing PKM 'systems' with some or all of four components:

PKM has also been linked to these tools:

Other useful tools include Open Space Technology, cultural anthropology, stories and narrative, mindmaps, concept maps and eco-language, and single frames and similar information visualization techniques. Individuals use these tools to capture ideas, expertise, experience, opinions, or thoughts, and this 'voicing' will encourage cognitive diversity and promote free exchanges away from a centralized policed knowledge repository. The goal is to facilitate knowledge sharing and personal content management.

See also

References

Most recent ones first

External links

Notes

  1. ↑ No Knowledge but through Information William Jones, 6 September 2010
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 9/24/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.