Over the past decade, organizations have been hard at work
developing new and better ways to create and share knowledge. Technology has made
it easier to collaborate and facilitated widespread access to information and
expertise. Unfortunately, the ever-increasing amounts of knowledge at our
fingertips do not seem to have improved our judgment. From top Wall Street
firms to national governments, we can all name organizations that, despite
their rich hoards of knowledge, have exhibited terrible judgment that has caused
them to falter and resulted in catastrophic damage.
If we accept that knowledge and judgment are not the same
thing, then we must ask ourselves: What goes into good judgment? How are
knowledge and judgment linked, and where do they diverge? And finally, why have
so many enterprises failed to form sound judgments, despite their extensive
knowledge?
And, as we do so, we must remember that judgment is based on
more than an accumulation of knowledge.
The final ingredients that go into judgment--that distinguish it from
knowledge--are empathy and values. Good judgment takes into account not just
ourselves, but all those who will be affected by a particular action. If
certain Wall Street executives had infused their decisions with this type of
judgment, the past year would likely have been a very different experience.
I look forward to exploring these issues at APQC's upcoming knowledge management conference, where I will delve further into the relationship between knowledge and judgment and offer some advice to organizations striving to make sound, knowledge-based decisions.
*****************************************************************************************************
Larry
Prusak is a leading researcher, author, and consultant. He is the founder and
director of the Institute for Knowledge Management, a global consortium of
member organizations engaged in advancing the practice of knowledge management
through action research.
Prusak will be among the keynote speakers at APQC's 2010
knowledge management conference, Driving Business Performance: The New Face of
Collaboration.
You can learn more about the conference by clicking here.
IMO, Knowledge is expertise that answers "How", while wisdom answers "Why"
"Wisdom is comprehension of what is true or right coupled with optimum judgment as to action"
- Wikipedia
The way I see it: the more knowledge you have the better your potential judgment ...but more *wisdom* is much better than knowledge
If we use Wikipedia again:
"The term judgment generally refers to the considered evaluation of evidence in the formation of making a decision. "
Thank you for the interesting article - too much knowledge without wisdom can be dangerous :-)
In broad meaning, Knowledge itself is human consciousness. In my view as well as my paradigm, knowledge epistemologically generated from human three knowing tools. The first is Peripheral Nerve System or Human Senses representing Human Knowledge with Lower Consciousness (KLC). The second is Central Nerve System or Mind Brain representing Human Knowledge with Medium Consciousness (KMC). The third is Human Consciousness DNA representing Human Knowledge with Higher Consciousness (KHC). Therefore, Knowledge is Human Enlightenment Agent (HEA) evolved as emergent property inside human body as complex system since beginning, having consciousness and free will (mind and value) as well as behaving dynamically as subject acting to transform physical realities into data and information toward higher level and maturity of knowledge and beyond ( http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/we-are-the-knowledge-hybrid ). In eastern concept, Knowledge known as Noor or “light”
Within narrow meaning, Knowledge located at the domain of DIKW continuum model. Hence, I suggested to separate DI with KW into DI-KW model to give emphasize the paradigm above mentioned ( http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/blooms-taxonomy-knowledge-and )
If it is postulated that the nature of KM derived from the nature of human above mentioned, then in KM, KM Tools generated from KLC, KM Process Framework generated from KMC and KM Standards (culture and value management) generated from KHC respectively.
Because our Knowledge in broad meaning is human consciousness ( KLC-KMC-KHC) or functioning as Human Enlightenment Agent (HEA) currently under pressure of very turbulent and nonlinearity of our non-physical eco-system including the “race between human mind and machine mind (IT)” almost reaching its peak (in 2012?), we as human should put balance of our mind set between deducto-hypothetico-verificative as human scientific competence with our gnosis as natural or particular gift for doing something. In other words, human should decide their “Jump Time” to make “Great Turning” from the BRAIN as locus of Mind to theDNA as locus of Consciousness and Value” ( http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/knowledge-towards-2012-great )
So, within context of “Using Knowledge Wisely: The Components of Good Judgment” we should exercise our judgement by making new balance or at least making “shift to the right” from our Newtonian mind set into domain of Knowledge with higher consciousness (KHC) and beyond. In practicing KM, we should give priority in establishing the what so called “Enterprise DNA” comprising of two essential components, Enterprise Knowledge Architecture and Taxonomy-Metadata Management ( http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/the-importance-of-taxonomy)
When I was consulting on content management systems, we used to talk about "levels" of information:
Data = letters, numbers, bits, bytes, pixels, etc.
Content = organized data - documents, pictures, videos, spreadsheets, data tables, etc.
Information = content returned in response to a specific query
Knowledge = applied information
Wisdom = ability to use knowledge well
Within this rubric, Larry Prusak's "judgement" might be seen as a way in which knowledge is used wisely.
What do you think?
Larry Hiner, PsyD