180 likes | 367 Views
META-ENGINEERING COLLOQUIUM. Organizational knowledge. Process. Infrastructure. People. Theory of Organizational Knowledge William P. Hall (PhD) http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net Australian Centre for Science, Innovation and Society and Engineering Learning Unit,
E N D
META-ENGINEERING COLLOQUIUM Organizational knowledge Process Infrastructure People Theory of Organizational Knowledge William P. Hall (PhD) http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net Australian Centre for Science, Innovation and Societyand Engineering Learning Unit, Melbourne School of Engineering, Melbourne University Email: whall@unimelb.edu.au 5 October 2009 Leave one of the legs off, and the stool will fall over
My Background • Majored in physics for 3 years but dyslexic with numbers • Hands on with all generations of computers • PhD 1973 Harvard Univ. in evolutionary biology • Univ. Melbourne Research Fellow genetics 1977-1979 • Migrated to Australia in 1980, & bought a PC prototype • Turned to computer literacy teaching and tech writing • Software development & banking through 1989 • Joined Tenix ‘90 for $7 bn ANZAC Ship Project • Through July 2007 commercial and engineering content and knowledge management systems analysis and design roles through entire ANZAC project cycle • Since 2000 combining practice, fundamental & development research in engineering KM http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Why do engineers need to manage knowledge? • Engineering processes and products are knowledge intensive and fallible! • Design, Manufacturing, Operation • Management is knowledge intensive • The “post-human” organization • Organizations are complex dynamic systems • Difference between complex and complicated • Organizations have minds of their own (my research area) • Cannot be predicted, can only be constrained • Involve much more than people • Depend on "system of systems" to manage knowledge • System of systems components include • Infrastructure (e.g., physical premises, ICT, software) • Processes • People! (most difficult area for engineers) • Concern to build a scientifically grounded understanding of this system of systems http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Gap: foundation questions about knowledge • What is knowledge? • Deep and difficult philosophical question for anyone • Metaphysics vs reality • Theory laden terminology can lead to raging debate • How to start a flame war • Ask a knowledge manager to define what it is they are supposed to manage • Poor concepts can cause major blind spots in KM programs • What is an organization? • More than just a group of people • Natural history vs science • Multitude of ad hoc “theories” vs a generic foundation • Inescapable relationship: knowledge | organization • Historical steps towards answering the questions http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
History: DIKIW / “WIKID Power” • Ackoff (1988), Coombe (1996) Army Info Management • Cognitive processing transforms content and adds value • Data = differences • Contextualized data→information (differences that make a difference - Bateson) • Semantically linked information → knowledge (tentative solutions to problems) • Knowledge + assesment → intelligence (intelligence, with uncertainty, is deduced after several pieces of knowledge are assessed together) • Intelligence tested through application in the world to reduce uncertainty → wisdom • Wisdom leads to strategic power SEMANTICS http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Tacit, Implicit and Explicit • Vines & Hall in prep after Polanyi, Nichols Semantics http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Keys to answering “what is organizational knowledge” • Evolutionary epistemology (Karl Popper) • “Three worlds” ontology: (1) reality / (2) cybernetics / (3) code • Living knowledge built via evolutionary processes • Knowledge is “solutions to problems” • Solutions embodied as “control information” in feedback loops Popper’s “General Theory of Evollution” http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Generic learning cycle • OODA – John Boyd • Jet fighter ace in Korean War • Strategic thinker http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
A major key • Autopoiesis (H Maturana, F Varela -“self” + “production”) • When can a complex system be considered to be living? • Self-identifiably bounded • Complex • Mechanistic, self-regulating • System boundaries internally determined (self referential) • System intrinsically produces its own components • Self-produced components are necessary and sufficient to produce the system (autonomy). • Autopoietic systems recursively produce and maintain themselves • Governed by laws of physical thermodynamics • Many organizations are autopoietic http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
HIGHER LEVEL SYSTEM / ENVIRONMENT Another major key boundaryconditions, constraints, regulations, actualities FOCAL LEVEL SYSTEM "HOLON" SYSTEM Possibilitiesinitiatingconditionsuniversallaws"material -causes" SUBSYSTEMS • Theory of hierarchically complex systems (H. Simon, H. Pattee, J. Hoffmeyer, S. Salthe) http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
More concepts • Information theory - C. Shannon, W. Weaver • Physical basis for information (but not meaning) • Biosemiotics (biological communication theory) – C.S. Pierce, H. Pattee, J. Hoffmeyer, C. Emmeche, M. Barbieri • Communication (information) • Signification (meaning) • Habit formation (learning) of living processes • Causality (upward and downward causation) – Aristotle, S. Salthe • Applicability to hierarchically complex systems • Epistemic cuts – H. Pattee, J. Hoffmeyer, H. Atmanspacher • The world vs knowledge of the world; a control vs control information • Physical basis of Popper’s three worlds • Code duality – J. Hoffmeyer, C. Emeche • Embodied or “structural” knowledge vs codified knowledge • Biological basis for Popper’s three worlds • Bounded rationality – H. Simon http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Organizational autopoiesis • Many organizations meet all the requirements to be considered to be autopoietic • Self-identifiably bounded • Employee registers, ID badges, uniforms, walls, guards, fences, etc. • Complex • People, machines, premises • Mechanistic, self-regulating • Governance and accounting systems, processes • System boundaries internally determined (self referential) • HR systems, planning departments, property deeds • System intrinsically produces its own components • Induction, training, apprenticeship • Self-produced components are necessary and sufficient to produce the system (autonomy) • Organizational knowledge (Nelson & Winter 1982) • Structural knowledge – “tacit routines” – Popper’s world 2 • Codified knowledge – documents & formal processes http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Implementing OODA system of systems in the organization http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Knowledge and individuals • Individuals in an organizational environment (Vines & Hall in prep) • Personal knowledge (person’s own life management) • Person’s knowledge relating to organizational roles • what knowledge is needed • who may know the answer • where the explicit knowledge may be found • why the knowledge is important or why it was created • when the knowledge was last needed or may be needed in the future • how to apply the knowledge http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
The autopoietic organization • Vines and Hall in prep http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Applying OODA to formal knowledge in the organization • Vines & Hall in prep http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net