Management

First published 11.2.2013

Evolution of the term  

The definition in Wikipedia includes the personal approximation to Management, but, if you take the time to read the entire item; you will find no personal approach under it. Looks like there is a pitfall using this term in the personal context! Sorry for that! Maybe I have being working so much time for companies that management is a term that I use even for my family life!!! As a simple check, I went to my wife and asked her: Darling, do you manage your time? The answer was clear and loud: NO! Damage!!  

- Me, I want to continue with it, because I feel that everyone can understand better that the actual needs requires more of you than being a ‘well organized person’ and to manage oneself time sounds as a new ‘paradigm’, but   

- My 'common sense' does not agree! Let us see: Management is (at least, could be considered ) in the domain of some social science, which means; theory, people, PhD’s, marketing, enterprises, &c. My good! A universe! And are we going on with the ‘personal approach to management’? What should we do? Ok, let us act as politicians (or maybe as managers): Just put our ties in its correct place, smile and, Go ahead!

What are the sources?

Cognitive sciences (assumed as included in First Point), Business Management, Business Knowledge Management.

What about Social Business?  What about Social media in business?

Pre requisite

After some work over the issue, I feel that some skills on business management should be required to those how approximate to the Personal Knowledge Management approach.

Approach: 'organism as a business'

The idea could be: Formalize an organism as a business. There will be a GM, a CEO, a CFO,  process, products, &cetera

That roles and persons and things could be created under the Human flow, but it looks like that that will not work over the Natural flow. Making the exercise could be a way to approach to management.

Approximating a 'new Era':  

First of all we will try not to get some personality disorders. That looks not good at all. Then, under ‘personal management’ we will try to transform the good manners of management into the personal knowledge context in the aim to expose tools that permits to adequately control and push oneself to have, a bigger boat!? If we are able and that's oneself target, Why not?

Just do it!   

Yes, that comes from Nike commercials.

Simple recommendation, but it looks like something is missing…   

Another vision, that includes a feed back loop could be:  

Just do it!  ...come on doing it

It looks like Just do it has another face:  Il fâut le faire!

How (and what)to measure. About effort and time

By now we have the fluxes and from First Point a model supported on the knowledge structure (KS)and a way to modify it and now we must assume that that requires a hard work to be done and consume time. It is a petty, It looked so simple! And there is that Oneself for doing the job! Yeah! But, as you know modifying knowledge requires effort and tools. Life is a general term that  somehow has to be restricted if management theory and techniques are to be applied; we will go on this issue latter.

Knowledge structure, as defined is not valid as a management entity. The way of changing could be something that can be 'controlled'. So 'Human flow looks like something to be managed because it is costly' could be seen as a way.  

A variable named something like 'Mental effort' could be stated to reflect the work an if it is possible to establish a relation between 'Mental effort' and 'Human flow'. But: Natural flow also consumes 'mental effort', examples of that can be found in exercise. So we have to define two kinds of mental effort… And also emotions could affect it. As described, the whole process is heavily interactive and so the Human flow in some cases runs almost out of control. Examples could be process that run over great emotional modulation, as anger or fear or 'love'. More irresolute problems could be found over this element; for example, you can execute a learning activity with explicit learning objectives, but which of those will be in someone knowledge structure is another thing (Yeah! That's why exams are for!). So we have to define two kinds of mental effort and then try to measure the impact of modulation… Let us look at other  approach.

Natural flow looks a better site since measuring could be done over what is done. And what is done has properties in time space domain. So it looks like behavioral concepts are to be applied or at least considered.

Note: as said, go to next bookstore and buy something amusing…

Now, as What is more or less clear (Natural flow ) we can try on how.

As said, in the domain of Natural flow every thing is in the current human extended world. Natural flow (acts) always have a target, so measure could be done in terms of establishing a variable in the time space domain that could represent Natural flow 'position' and by means of which the distance to a target could be measured. This process of measuring could be done in time so no interferences on the Natural flow should be expected. This way is that usually is described as: 'after a meeting, review results and decide new actions', where 'decide' and 'measure the distance to the target' converge more or less in the meaning.

The model establish that if there is a mismatch in acting, will be executed a Human flow process that consist in acquiring the means for the Natural flow to achieve  and over this subtract, a relation between measures over Natural flow and Human flow process can be constructed. So it could be that management in this domain has to do with mismatches in the Natural Flow. So, what if we the distance to the target with the means that modulates perception so the process gets auto feeded can be related ?

In the other hand, the feed back process has another 'propertie'. As it acts as a trigger for Human flow process, and this one gets in those that can be controles, as the ones that actuate for some new things to be incorporated in the Knowledge structure because new dimensions are to be included in the target, Target itself becomes a usable thing for describing Natural flow management. This process suggest to focus on the target dimensions to establish management actions. For example, it could be stated an 'strategy' as 'not implementing new dimension unless enough distance reduction on the existing space is achieved' or 'look for new variables if distance has not been enough reduced since the last checking'. Effort, now, could be also observed, and conveniently managed through  to check if there are ways to maintain distance reduction with less effort; back up effort could be required for new improvements.

Time could be next considered. It is an external variable, so there is not influence from an organism over time and from this some pros and cons arise.

Personal productivity is a measure about how much 'product' is obtained per time unit.

The bunch of tools that permits establishing the distance to a target in a compromise between efficiency and effectiveness, where the last two 'terms' refer to how the distance to a target could de managed, could be named as Personal Knowledge Management tools or just PKM.

The question of how the target is established  has not an easy answer, It is a hen - egg problem so it can be assumed that, by any means and some how target is established.

PKM has to do with Human flow, with how and what new or existing things and their perceptions are to be established, that is what and how are included in the KS for the Natural flow.

Changing perceptions will affect the way of:

- which things are perceived  

- how things are related  

- which tools are related with which thing  

- which tools are used to modulate the learning process.

PKM in this approach is related with emotions.

What changes

...

  

Hierarchies over the mesh    

If we are trying to manage knowledge, as managing implies order it will be necessary to define some order. For example, a Practice Community establishes a domain and so an order; an Ontology accomplishes the function with a stronger order relation.

As Knowledge structure contains all the 'Personal Knowledge', one approach could be establish first an ordered group of areas and then try establish an order over each area . This has been the traditional approach. It might continue being a good approach but for the social recent changes. So the analysis should be by focusing on those social recent changes. The technological changes and the 'semantic changes'…

KS contains a mix of domains.

Where are the limits?

Natural flow, has the 'space and time' domain so we are used to organize things in that space of four dimensions. If the space that is being  managed is defined over more dimensions, order becomes something to be constructed.

For example, an efficient plan can be constructed in the sense that along time the results are efficient in time. That do not 'implies' that they are in the 'money / time' domain.

As Human Flow is multidimensional, there is a problem on defining which variables are to be selected to as the organization chart variables. The habitual way is to establish a complex variable that is a function of others.

Do the mental tools form one hierarchy could be applied over another one?

Business

From the definition of management in Wikipedia (is easy to reach that on the  web) follows the need of clarifying two 'terms", business and "organizational activities". Following that trend I wrote: 'Let us say that a simple business requires a simple management. As it gets bigger (in any sense)more management should be needed and organizational activities could become an issue'. But It sound nonsense to follow that trend. I can suggest a simplified definition for 'business' (looking it from inside): people and processes.

Let me explain this:

As business born and die (1), we can focus around the birth, of an specimen: Basically it will be needed: an idea, money for buying things, tools and so on and some one to execute the idea (obtaining so the 'product' or the 'service' and of course for selling it). Why money is missing on the above definition: from this point of view, money is not strictly a needed part of a business, I mean, of course that a business could be formalized just for its economics, but letting banks apart, from inside, money can be seen as 'the force  of Star Wars', at least, let us assume that. Something more is lacking, don't it?  Ok,  physical tools and the 'matter' are needed  to be transformed and at last have something to sell (what about if that is a service?).

Now, let us see if and how can we match Personal Knowledge management, under the proposed model of Knowledge with this simplified model of a business. It looks like:

matter could match with the knowledge structure,

processes with the mental processes and,  

what about people? At most could be two: The 'One'  and the 'Him /Her Self'. Oh! 'Its Self ' was just a tool, so just one: The 'One'.

And so: Brilliant result!! Yeah!! That's for the Nobel prize:

Personal -> Me

Knowledge -> My Knowledge structure

Management -> My mental tools.

Great, at least it could be said in an elevator trip!

NOTE:

At the Introduction I made the promise not to run under the kind of approach of the Self Help manuals but, might be better use of your time acquiring some of them, instead of continue reading here!!!

…

Oh! Steel there?

So lets go ahead going back.

¿Matter? Are the 'material thinks' part of the business? Really they aren't. For example, the product could be done by others. So no 'matter' is needed. So as said, its enough with just People and tools to describe a business from inside, so

Houston, we have a problem!!!

We do not need the Knowledge Structure!!!

…

NOTE:

ibid

...

Oh!! Steel there??!!!!

So 'Me' and 'My tools' is the issue… well, looks like a little tricky… as the 'tools box' is the knowledge structure it is need at least for carrying the tools. (No, there is not enough place in your iPhone to carry your mental tools!)

 ________________

(1) Grow or die! Sveiby.

 UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Terms from the Business management

Different focus on different divisions

Cross applications

Risk

Stakeholders

Division, size

Efficiency, Effectiveness

Productivity. A component of Effectiveness in Business that is very well documented. Some 'try to' approaches by different definitions of this term:

- [Levitan, 1984.citado en] Could be seen as a rate that shows how well resources are being used.

How to translate this to the Flow model? Looks like it has to be related,  with the distance to the target, that is some dimensions could be added to the target definition to obtain the 'influence' of resources.

- [Leonard Mertens.1999] Innovation assumes a dynamic paradigm. Innovation is not just about technology; also is about organization and human resources, and in this area about 'formación y capacitación, remuneración, participación y ergonomía.'

How to translate this to the Flow model? Is related with the Natural flow in the sense that if should work like a diente de sierra...

Quality

Know How

Work Group,

Decisions that implies comparable alternatives.

Under management acts there is always a decision.

Management is about determining the changes and measuring the effort.

Management

Next to target definition over a surrounding are:

 .- to follow evolution

.- decisions about investment

.- take care about expenses and be able to abandon if necessary.

Expenses and Investments

Any act(natural flow) should be considered an expense.

Any thinking (Human flow) should be considered an investment.

Natural flow as a source for control.

Marketing

.1 Listening the audience

 We are arrived to a surrounding, different ways of naming this.

 Al cambiar la estructura de conocimiento desde el flujo humano aparecerá un trabajo en el flujo natural ¿siempre? Creo que sí, puede que ese tabajo no se ejecute, con lo que en algunos casos se olvidarán los cambios (dsaparecerán los elementos estructurales relacionados con ese flujo humano)y en otras se presentarán (como el caso del rencor, el odio, …)

¿Debe existir una coherencia enre los dos flujos? No es necesario en tanto en cuanto que se puedan mantener en subestrucuras que se relacionen con poca influencia hay muchos ejemplos: dualidad de personalidad, trabajo que no tiene nada que ver con la vida familiar, matemáticos puros… hacer un libre

Case study

Control

  It is a centric way of observing things. Also you can be more realistic and try too observe yourself trying to reach the center.

 In the human flow, you can get out and look it form outside.

If you change how you look at the surroundings  and matching them with the natural flow.

Terms from the Learning process

Learning process is the one that permits to modify knowledge structure. Knowledge process is equivalent term.

In every modification, some inconsistencies could be introduced.

An existing tool is used, modifying the correspondent part of the knowledge structure.

A new tool is being introduced.

A change in the surroundings is detected.

A new object is perceived (is to be incorporated)

What is an object?

My process for example.

PKM is new for me. It was 'just some words'. I am interested in it as said in the Presentation.

In the Natural flow  a lot of personal management is being carried (children, family, education, money, …) That suggest PKM as something in the domain of the Human flow.  It 'sounds' that for me an approach could be feasible: I know about the three words 'enough' and I have some knowledge on how to 'formalize' a new thing in the Human flow. I will try to populate that new concept employing 'all' the tools that I have.

I will maintain that process till I arrive to a solution.

Steps:

- Propose a model for Personal Knowledge

- Understand what do management has to do with the personal aspect of PKM.