When Metaphors Get Knowledge Wrong Why common knowledge management terms mislead our thinking

Knowledge Management often relies on metaphors like “sharing” or “capturing” knowledge. These terms blur the crucial difference between knowledge and information, creating confusion. Clear thinking begins by recognizing that only information can be stored or transferred. In contrast, knowledge itself remains personal, contextual, and shaped by human interaction.

The terminology frequently employed in Knowledge Management, such as “knowledge sharing,” “knowledge capture,” “knowledge transfer,” “knowledge flow,” and “knowledge harvesting,” is problematic for several reasons.

Even when used metaphorically, these terms fail to accurately represent the nature and dynamics of knowledge. The primary issue lies in the fundamental distinction between knowledge and information.

Once knowledge is captured or encoded, it transforms into information, which can be stored, transferred, or exchanged, but not in the manner suggested by these metaphors.

Knowledge as Information

When we talk about capturing knowledge, we are truly capturing information. By its nature, knowledge is intangible and personal, deeply rooted in individual experiences and cognitive processes. Once this knowledge is encoded—whether in writing, speech, or any other medium—it ceases to be knowledge in its purest form and becomes information.

This transformation is crucial because information, unlike knowledge, can be easily stored in databases, transferred between systems, and retrieved when needed. However, this process of encoding inherently strips away the context and depth that constitute true knowledge.

Misleading Metaphors

The commonly used metaphors—sharing, capturing, transferring, flowing, and harvesting—imply actions and characteristics that do not apply to knowledge.

1. Knowledge Sharing: This term suggests a communal distribution of knowledge akin to sharing physical resources. However, what is actually being shared is information, as knowledge in its pure form remains locked within the individual’s mind.
2. Knowledge Capture: Capturing implies that knowledge can be seized and stored in its entirety. In reality, only information, the encoded form of knowledge, can be captured. This translation often loses the richness and context of knowledge.
3. Knowledge Transfer: Transfer suggests a direct conveyance from one entity to another. While information can be transferred via documents, emails, and other media, transferring knowledge requires interpretation and understanding, processes that go beyond the mere transmission of data.
4. Knowledge Flow: Flow implies a continuous and self-propelled movement, like a river. Information can be transmitted through networks and systems, but it does not flow in the self-sustaining manner that this metaphor suggests. Information transfer requires infrastructure and deliberate action, not spontaneous movement.
5. Knowledge Harvesting: Harvesting evokes an image of reaping a crop, gathering knowledge as a tangible resource. This metaphor overlooks the fact that what is being harvested is actually information. The insights and understanding that constitute true knowledge remain within the cognitive domain of individuals.

The Complexity of Human Interaction

When people converse, they engage in a complex interaction that goes far beyond merely exchanging information. Conversations involve the sharing of perspectives, the negotiation of meaning, and the co-construction of understanding. This dynamic process cannot be reduced to simple information exchange. The richness of human interaction lies in the ability to convey nuances, emotions, and unspoken implications, aspects that are intrinsic to knowledge but not information.

Additional Problematic Terms

Here are some additional potentially problematic terms:

1. Knowledge repository: This term suggests that knowledge can be stored in a central location when, in reality, it’s information being stored.
2. Knowledge base: Similar to the knowledge repository, this implies knowledge can be collected and accessed directly.
3. Knowledge extraction: This term incorrectly implies that knowledge can be directly pulled from someone’s mind.
4. Knowledge dissemination: While information can be disseminated, knowledge cannot be directly spread.
5. Knowledge codification: This term suggests that knowledge can be directly encoded rather than transformed into information.
6. Tacit knowledge transfer: Tacit knowledge is difficult to articulate, so the idea of transferring it directly is problematic.
7. Knowledge assets: This term incorrectly treats knowledge as a tangible, ownable asset.
8. Knowledge mapping: While you can map information sources or expertise, you can’t directly map knowledge itself.
9. Knowledge retention: Organizations can retain information and expertise, not knowledge directly.
10. Knowledge creation: This term oversimplifies the complex process of learning and developing new understandings.

Conclusion

All these metaphors fail to recognize the critical distinction between knowledge and information, leading to a superficial understanding of the processes involved. To truly appreciate the dynamics of knowledge, we need to move beyond these metaphors and acknowledge the deeper, more complex nature of human cognition and interaction. Only then can we develop more accurate and effective approaches to managing and leveraging knowledge in organizations.