Davenport and Prusak define knowledge as:
…a fluid mix of framed experience, values contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, it often becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices and norms.1
For me, the most important words above is that of “framed experience” and “contextual information”. We often fail to recognise that others cannot know what we know because their experience is different from our own. No matter how the knowledge is imparted it will be interpreted differently. But don’t despair. This is where the magic of knowledge lies.
In the lead up to becoming a parent, other parents relayed stories of sleepless nights, dirty nappies and other such horrors of a newborn child. I listened knowing that I didn’t really understand. In fact I almost became aware of a secret society. Those who are parents and those who are not. Now that I am a parent and have lived the sleepless nights and the joys of first smiles I can say that I understand. I had the information in advance. Now I have the experience as well. Of course, stories of toddlers and teenagers still elude me. To make my point I’ll ask you to consider your own position. If you’re a parent can you understand me at a level different from that you remember before parenthood. If you’re not a parent can you truly claim to understand?
Footnotes
-
Thomas H. Davenport and Lawrence Prusak (2000) “Working Knowledge” (USA: Harvard Business School Press, p.5 ↩