Knowledge Management (Part 2)

Thanks to the internet, it won’t be long before most, or all, of the world’s explicit knowledge will be at our fingertips. But the mere presence of information does not necessarily impart knowledge. For example, if all the world’s understanding on how to play the violin were reduced to a two-volume set, would reading it bring you any closer to making a harmonious sound? Would you want your surgeon to have imbibed every technical piece of data about your appendix, but never to have actually performed an appendectomy? Certainly not. And that is because true craftsmanship is not simply the ability to find information, but rather the practical application of that knowledge. And the world pays a premium for those who can reduce theory to practice.

One fundamental precept of Knowledge Management is that there is a distinction to be made between explicit knowledge (objective, rules-based, easily captured) and tacit knowledge (subjective judgment, insights, experience, rules of thumb, technique). It is exceedingly difficult to systematically capture tacit knowledge, so an effective KM program must create effective channels to access this tacit know-how.

All too often KM initiatives go astray by failing to understand the explicit/tacit distinction. Corporate portals and databases are built and then filled beyond capacity with data of every description. Due to the overload of information, and the difficulty of maintaining currency, and the complexity of searching huge databases, this type of data junkyard lacks the context that allows use of the data to actually make a decision.

It is the combination of explicit and tacit knowledge that leads to the end goal of all KM programs: Information in context to produce an actionable understanding.

With this in mind, a law department can undertake initiatives designed to enhance knowledge sharing habits and add appropriate tools to:

· Foster a culture of knowledge sharing;

· Provide easy access to tools for the creation, sharing and using of information;

· Allow high quality work to be achieved in less time;

· Impart a greater sense of professional value.

Upcoming posts will explore specific methods to achieve these aims.

In the previous post, we imagined a fictional individual who had to relearn his life on a daily basis. On the other end of the spectrum, Issac Asimov wrote of a fictional race of aliens who had the capacity to share experience across each other’s minds, so that a learning by one would be immediately understood by all. Perhaps such a complete state of knowledge sharing is only in the realm of science fiction, yet it is a goal for which any law department can strive.