Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: colloquy on knowledge and money

Expand Messages
  • Denham Grey
    Paul, Let me jump in here and ask some simple questions. What is the essential value in descriptive enumeration and how does this differ from other knowledge
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 11, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Paul,

      Let me jump in here and ask some simple questions.

      What is the essential value in "descriptive enumeration" and how does
      this differ from other knowledge practices such as lessons learned,
      best practices, FAQs, common problem / solution pairs, or making
      distinctions?

      Knowledge technologies:
      http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/akt/kmi_tr_106.pdf

      I'm having real difficulty understanding the core rationale behind
      descriptive enumeration and how this differs from e.g. an issue based
      approach such as Quest Map or the older gIbis approach to building a
      corporate memory, capturing rational and gatehring experience.

      Quest map:
      http://www.gdss.com/omq/aboutQM.htm

      gIbis:
      http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~kremer/resTalk/high/gIBIS.html

      Please help.
    • Paul Prueitt
      To the Community of Practice e-forum: Please excuse the rather long reply.. *** Denham, The Descriptive Enumeration (DE) methodology is similar to these other
      Message 2 of 4 , Jun 12, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        To the Community of Practice e-forum:

        Please excuse the rather long reply..

        ***

        Denham,

        The Descriptive Enumeration (DE) methodology is similar to these other
        methods.

        (Denham provided the following links)
        http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/akt/kmi_tr_106.pdf
        http://www.gdss.com/omq/aboutQM.htm
        http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~kremer/resTalk/high/gIBIS.html

        ****these are excellent references, thanks Denham***

        In a SIMPLE PowerPoint presentation (view using IE) the use of the method is
        demonstrated in context.

        see: http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/pprueitt/private/KM_files/frame.htm

        DE is not going to be a branded methodology owned by someone. It is a basic
        tool, and understanding, that enumerates the concepts seen from a certain
        perspective. It is generic.

        DE is has the context of sense making, with formative aspects of
        variability, coherence, completeness and consistency.

        There is nothing new here except the simplicity.

        What might be different is the intellectual link to the WARNING (also made
        in the link above) that false sense making can (and will) occur WHEN
        knowledge mapping is automated beyond a certain point. Template matching
        and heuristic knowledge mapping techniques can lead to such false sense
        making. The human has to be involved in a way that is formative, and this
        requires a stratified approach to knowledge aggregation within
        situationedness.

        http://www.ontologystream.com/prueitt/whitePapers/Situationedness.htm (an
        OSI previous response to Pat Langford's excellent post)

        This situationedness of the experience of knowledge (by individuals and by
        communities) is where we find something new related to DE and the way my
        group develops knowledge mapping, and use.

        Decision support in critical environments (private stock trading,
        battlefield management, deciding which person to marry, nuclear weapons
        exchanges) better not be fully automated. <smile>

        ***

        The OntologyStream Inc (for profit) and BCNGroup.org (not-for profit) are
        attempting to establish a community of founders for a science of knowledge.
        We need support:

        http://www.ontologystream.com/bcnsignup.htm if we are to gather together as
        an international organization.

        ***

        DE is a distillation of enumerative methods and thus is descriptive of
        various of the knowledge mapping processes.

        ***

        You said:

        "I'm having real difficulty understanding the core rationale behind
        descriptive enumeration and how this differs from e.g. an issue based
        approach such as Quest Map or the older gIbis approach to building a
        corporate memory, capturing rational and gathering experience."

        and we in turn do not understand. Why is there difficulty? Are you being
        rhetorical? Is this a leading question, a criticism, or part of the
        colloquy? The notion of bringing in someone into one's world view is
        perhaps relevant - since the claim that one does not understand is often a
        claim made when one is not willing to see another viewpoint and embrace
        this.

        see: http://www.uia.org/uiadocs/entrap.htm on the metaphor of "entrapment"

        We invite you to be entrapped. <smile>

        ***

        I have a question for the participants of this forum (and invite commits
        from the cc list).

        Why is it important how DE differs from Quest Map or the older gIbis (what
        ever gIbis is?). Denham is pointing to the best of the leading edge of KM
        methodology.

        We claim that there is no competition needed, but rather an integration,
        simplification and a de-mystification. We claim that there is nothing about
        DE that a young child does not immediately understand. Collaboration and
        the pulling together of an international organization is needed so that (as
        Bo Newman reminded me recently) the KM leading edge is coherent rather then
        in-coherent. KMCI and KM-forum.org and KMI and KMSI etc are all good
        organizations... however it is necessary to ground KM in the experimental
        sciences of cognitive neuroscience and in a logic of open stratified general
        systems theory. (Why not?). This is the mission of the BCNGroug.org

        http://www.bcngroup.org/admin/Charter.html

        The intellectual coherence is needed so that organizations like Mitre and
        Logistic Management Institute and other think tanks can present proper
        advise to the government and to society regarding what is knowledge
        technology.


        ***

        DE is not about (only) building a corporate memory. It is about the process
        of enumerating a view point so that the description of this view point can
        be examined. So these GOALS (building a corporate memory, capturing
        rational and gathering experience) is partially addressed using DE.

        I first began to see "it" when asking college mathematics students to
        enumerate the topic of a chapter into three categories {things I know,
        things I do NOT know, and things that I do not know that I do not know }.
        This DE leads into a specific process of restructuring the self image of the
        individual so that the "immune response to very poor arithmetic training"
        can be addressed. (sigh... this work was never allowed to be published
        within the mathematics education literature.) But it is a wonderful gift -
        if only it could be accepted. I could talk privately about this over the
        phone 703-981-2676).

        I regress... my apology. But, the overall mythology of restructuring self
        image for that 93% of the population who have learned to be enable to add
        fractions, can be directly applied to business process re-engineering (why
        not?).

        ***

        Again, life is not only about marketing and business. There are significant
        human endeavors that have nothing to do with marketing or business. (We
        realize that this is a controversial statement.. but it is our knowledge
        claim.)

        None of the methodologies that you have mentioned fulfill completely the
        GOAL of building a corporate memory, capturing rational and gathering
        experience is questionable. First, this is over selling what we have (what
        DE, Quest map or other KM methodology has). Second, the other side of the
        coin is the degree to which communities of practice adopt knowledge mapping
        methodologies. Here again, there is more left to do that has been done to
        day.

        I imagine that you agree with me.
      • Denham Grey
        ... gIbis (graphics Issue based information system) is an early groupware system (SUN) for decision support and capturing corporate memory. Here is a short
        Message 3 of 4 , Jun 12, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Paul writes:

          > Why is it important how DE differs from Quest Map or the older
          > gIbis (what ever gIbis is?).

          gIbis (graphics Issue based information system) is an early groupware
          system (SUN) for decision support and capturing corporate memory.
          Here is a short abstract:

          http://www.acm.org/pubs/toc/Abstracts/tois/59297.html

          This is not competition, it is an inquiry and exporation to
          understand the distinctive value of your DE (descriptive enumeration)
          claims. I'm starting from areas I know, and looking for uniqueness
          and insights in your work. DE (as I understand it) concentrates on
          phrases that define the current situation, QuestMap and gIbis seek to
          uncover and document the rationale (assumptions) behind perceptions,
          decisions and claims. This seems to be another form of enumeration.

          You also write:
          > This DE leads into a specific process of restructuring the self
          > image of the individual so that the "immune response to very poor
          > arithmetic training" can be addressed.

          How is this different from reflection?

          I'm suggesting DE may be one form of a larger community memory genre.

          Patterns: optimal solutions to recurring issues / forces
          FAQ: answers to common questions
          DE: situation descriptors
          Profiles: collections of pointers
          Distinctions: differences that make a difference
          Best practices: what is known to work
          Lessons learned: things to avoid also called anti-patterns
          Problem / solution pairs: working answers to recognized issues

          My difficulty is piecing all your stuff together Paul, gathering
          sufficient context so it makes sense to me in terms of thought forms
          (mental models?) I'm familiar with. How you take the replies from a
          DE and use these to surface deeper issues, combine them together and
          engage in another cycle of DE?, is also something I do not clearly
          comprehend.

          We certainly agree on the benefits of having people-in-the-loop as
          this is the only way to incorporate intuition, seemless adaption and
          subtle awareness into the system. I'm very aware of the constraints
          of strong AI, having practiced in that paradigm for some considerable
          time and now a long time convert to the 'blended' approach you
          advocate.

          This is not about entrapment Paul, which I suggest, may itself be a
          recursive mindset, i.e. define yourself 'outside the box', and those
          inside then become entrapped!!
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.