A worm on the apple

Since the beginning I've maintained the position that knowledge, if that word refers to 'something', is personal and after having made a recent googling of the tendencies over the subject, I feel comfortable: it looks that almost everyone is in that trend. It is a fact that the terminology is still using the 'formalization' of explicit and tacit, but I think that it is just about trying to grasp at straws because of the old principles of management. Theoretically, I think that it is enough to have three concepts, data, information and knowledge (definitions for such approach can be easily find on the Web) and that explicit knowledge could be reduced to information. 'Data' is to be maintained as an entity just because as a mean to justify the physical support (for example, to 'name' every thing that is on a Google disk server has we can use 'data'- but it can be maintained that on the knowledge domain if there is not an 'human access' to that data, it is 'nothing' and that once it is 'accessed' it is information being used to acquire knowledge).

From the point of view of a company, it looks like the only way to 'improve' its knowledge is to 'adquire it', and the only way to do that is including people that has the 'missing knowledge'. The problem so could be focused over two questions. The first is determining 'what' knowledge is missing. The second is, once acquired, 'to spread' the new knowledge over other employees. This trend can be traced over efforts on 'retain' and 'attract' the 'talent' that companies do.

Determining the 'what' looks like an entrepreneurship tasks. Could be seen positioned under the strategical core of an enterprise. Let us assume that by those means, a result can be reached (maybe through 'darwinian techniques') and that the 'what' is determined, quantified, located in the market and 'adquired'.

From there an 'opposition' (over 'encapsulation') could be established: The new knowledge could be seen as a worm on the apple (it makes it nest, gets fed up by the apple and some time latter flies away) or an approach that leads necessarily to running a transformation process so the apple, the company, changes to something else 'essentially different'.

So a meaningfull 'knowledge management', is not about what it looks like at fist , managing 'someting', but a consequence of a transformation process that will transform the company and so the company management if self; or will end with the 'fly away' of the butterfly; or in, the 'worst case', could extinguish the whole company.