Epistemological Knowledge Management

Vast is not a big enough word
Before I began the investigation into this area I had little preparation for the sheer depth , breadth and ancestry that this word concealed.
The term Epistemology can encompass vast areas of philosophical study that has generated heated debate across hundreds of years. Hirschheim(Unknown) cites Snyder's observations on eastern cultures' development of epistemology as far back as 600 BC. With that much history behind a word there would inevitably be a lot of reading ahead. In order to try and focus my research I attempted to ascertain simple definitions to aid my focus.

Definitions

The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy gives a broad definition: "study of knowledge and justified belief". There seem to be several viewpoints from this broader definition as further investigation reveals several divisions of epistemology. Gebert et al (2002) view epistemology as an investigation of knowledge itself but continue to sub categorize this into:
1/ Cognitivistic: rule based which organises knowledge into distinct structures which may exist independently to the individual.

2/ Autopoietic: context sensitive knowledge and embodied in the unit, which we can represent as an individual or an organisation. This word means self creation as is commonly used to refer to a biological entity or living system which has a boundary and may contain components (sounds like an organization to me ! )
To give examples of these I found it easier to relate these to my teaching experience.

Cognitivistic: In programming classes, teaching someone the rules associated with the difference between a Function and a Subroutine within visual basic. Then asking them to create examples of each type of coding practice. The student will then go through the process of learning by doing which will help them create their own sense of what the differences are. The student then builds upon those knowledge structures as they continue to study other programming languages cross referencing and transferring that knowledge to other programming languages and adapting what they have learnt.



Autopoietic:My initial view from the definition is if knowledge is context sensitive it is biased. Again using the teaching perspective I can look at autopoietic from both an individual or an organizational viewpoint. If I teach a set of students the concepts of structuring a program in visual basic, my experience and knowledge context provides a bias to how I then present my knowledge.
We can see direct examples of this in the KM workshops as each lecturer presents a concept and shares their knowledge of that concept biased by their own experiences. I could also consider that in the past my organisation may have had a bias to the way in which programming courses should be taught influencing the emphasis of certain areas of knowledge over others. Das(1999) makes reference to individual bias this and cites Krogh et al and comments on this in relation to management decision making whereby knowledge created by highly dynamic managers is potentially biased.

Jackson(2007) completed a more thorough investigated into framing this to an organisation and is unsure that autopoietic knowledge viewpoint can be successfully applied. One reason being that the components of the system, the employees, are also by definition autopoietic.

From the sublime to the ridiculous and back again
My initial investigations have lead me from excessively broad to incredibly focused and although this may not have been exactly the task it has broadened my understanding of epistemology and its relation to knowledge management.

If I reflect on my own experiences, I follow a very practical learning by doing approach:cognitive school of thought. Within a group environment or an organisation this will differ between person to person. If an organisation can be viewed as studying knowledge and accumulating it, autopoietic, then a successful KM approach would have to balance between the knowledge needs of the organisation as an entity as well as those within it.



Adendum: Knowledge management practice from an autopoietic and cognitive epistemological perspective.

Looking at this type of epistemology from the context of teaching, I was asked how this could offer practical help to an organisation. If we consider a teaching environment such as the example I gave then a knowledge management strategy could consist of a hybrid of both cognitive and autopoietic frameworks as a starting point. Gebert et al (2002) focused on the autopoiesis relating to Customer Relationship Management(CRM) but the same framework could be adapted to education.

A teaching organization could be described as a learning entity where the core competency is dissemination, research, creation, deconstruction and when appropriate replacement or removal of knowledge Information and data. Hall(2005) attributes similar activities to an organisation as a learning entity and suggests that these are "serving to maintain organisational integrity in a dynamic economic environment". One example of a supporting KM tool is a virtual learning environment (VLE). Such a tool can structure a knowledge management strategy from both a technological perspective and provide a platform for discussion forums, internal blogs and e-mail facilities allowing for social and cultural diversity.

The VLE, if managed properly, can represent a substantial knowledge repository for both lecturer and student alike. Taken to the extreme the VLE can represent the boundary of identity for the organisation itself and which is exemplified in the model used by the Open University dealing predominantly with distance learners: "Identity can be a source of competitive strength by distinguishing the organization from potential competitors", Santos and Eisenhardt (2005) .

The transient flow of both staff and pupils to and from the organization is immaterial, what is important is the institution as an entity promotes growth, self maintenance and preservation of its body of knowledge in a symbiotic relationship with those staff and students that the system comprises of at any one time: the system components. The Identity boundary of the organization will expand as the knowledge grows and will attract a greater depth and breadth of transient components( students and staff) all benefiting from and contributing to the treasury of knowledge.

I agree with both Jackson(2007) and Hall(2005) who both state that further research into this area needs to be done to clarify this viewpoint. As a conceptual frameworkt, viewing the organisation as a learning entity seems a very reasonable starting point with which to build a KM strategy and with most organisations, regardless of the industry, choosing an appropriate and flexible framework from which to build seems one of the greatest hurdles.




References

DAS, T. and Bing-Sheng, (1999). Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: an Integrative Perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 36(6), pp. 757-778.

Gebert, H., Geib, M., Kolbe, L.M., Riempp, G. (2002),Towards customer knowledge management:integrating customer relationship management and knowledge management concepts, Second International Conference on Electronic Business 2002 Conference Proceedings, Taiwan.,pp (unknown)

Hall,W.,(2005),Biological nature of knowledge in the learning organisation,The Learning Organization,12(2), pp.169 - 188

Jackson, T,W. 2007. Applying autopoiesis to knowledge management in organisations, Journal of Knowledge Management,11(3),pp.78-91

Santos, F.M. and Eisenhardt, K.M., (2005). Organizational Boundaries and Theories of Organization. Organization Science, 16(5), pp. 491-508.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (2005),Epistemology, available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/, [Accessed 2 February 2009]

Wikipedia (unknown), Autopoiesis, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopoiesis, [Accessed 2 February 2009]