« Cycling to knowledge | Main | Commutation or factoring? in S2 »

December 27, 2006



These comments have been invaluable to me as is this whole site. I thank you for your comment.

Sean Murphy

I think Michael Schrage made an excellent point that effective collaboration reqires a shared workspace. It can be a cocktail napkin that two people can take turns sketching on, a sheet of graph paper, a whiteboard, "paper dolls" (cards or cut outs that present aspects of a configuration).

From his interview with Tom Peters

But what I saw—company after company—was that the innovation wasn't just about creative individuals, but about creative relationships—and particularly collaborative relationships.

And collaborative relationships need shared space (any collaborative medium—cocktail napkin to computer modeling that serves as communication space that two or more people share). After my first book came out, Shared Minds, I realized that I had to focus on this ... if we care about the future of collaboration we have to care about the future of shared space ... there's a real ecology there. Then prototypes became a fabulous vehicle for interacting within the process of innovation, within a shared space.

When I was a new reporter I was concerned with getting good quotes. Now, when I work with teams and consult, the gap between what people say and what they do is far more interesting. I became much more concerned about behaviors around prototyping, whether it's designers around the screen or marketers around models; design behaviors take a big shift around prototypes.

Behavior changes matters more than technological change.

In the world of newspaper journalism, language, fidelity to fact, and the interpretation of those facts in print are central concerns. In the real world—behavioral issues are much more critical. (In the real work of innovation) I view models and prototypes as battleground for thought and behaviors.

David Locke

Saying that "Representations are physical, tangible and material, they allow ideas and experience to have an independent existence in an externalized form" should not be taken to mean that the representation is necessarily explicit.

It will have to be explicit for KM practitioners to attempt to sell it like they do, as they cannot handle the implicit or tacit and certainly can't maximize the value of such resources as was the promise of KM.

You capture that knowledge without explicitness. And, you use it while it is still explicit. No, you don't have to capture it in text or wikis or boundary objects.

The comments to this entry are closed.