KM: Your Next Career?

Charles Darwin did not, as some assume, assert that the strongest would survive -- nor even the most intelligent. Rather, he said, it is those species best able to adapt that will outlive the others. Survival through environmental adaptation, however, applies not only to plants and animals but also to institutions, cultures, and professions. When we hear phrases such as "adapt or die," do we realize how closely these words might apply? This issue of the Journal focuses on an exciting opportunity for growth-through-adaptation, but one that may also seem threatening: knowledge management (KM).

In the course of its development, information and records management has faced three significant challenges calling for adaptation, each more formidable than the one before. In order of their emergence, these challenges have been micrographics, computer-based records systems, and KM. The emergence of microformats constituted the least problematic challenge because microfilming is an essentially reprographic application where the records' original formats and appearance did not change extraordinarily.

The discipline's encounter with computer-based systems, however, has been far more difficult. In some respects, information technology (IT) continues to challenge the discipline with a complex and increasingly diverse set of tools, with a constantly changing terrain of new products, new features, updates, and, sometimes, with an intimidating technology culture. Continuing difficulty in communicating and sharing roles with those who "own" the technology (e.g., IT and information systems) has made some functions, such as creating and applying records schedules, more contentious than before. We can take heart, however, that electronic records -- regardless of the technology -- are still recognizable and still have value as records.

KM is a horse of a very different color. Micrographics and electronic records have not forced us to abandon the very premises under which we work. KM, however, does ask that we go beyond -- even ignore -- some of the discipline's basic premises, such as the information life cycle, the records series, and the record as a (valuable) tangible byproduct of a transaction.

While KM may seem a bit remote, it is comforting that there is little new in the concept of "knowledge" and the can-do knowledge of KM. Taking refuge in the familiar, however, is not part of adaptation. We must learn the difference between "knowledge" and "information" and be able to answer such questions as: Can a "thing" (e.g., a document) be knowledge? Is knowledge a process rather than a tangible resource? What is an information ecology? What does it mean to leverage knowledge assets? How can we recycle information? What is tacit knowledge as opposed to explicit knowledge? Who are knowledge workers?

In some ways, KM is but a logical continuation of earlier resource management foci: personnel, facilities, data, information, and information technology. All of these, however, have been management initiatives, not ones originating in the information sector. It is the information management disciplines, then, that must adapt -- come to terms with KM -- or be marginalized by management as unresponsive or irrelevant to the organization's KM activities. What we must face is an enlarged and enriched agenda, one responsive to -- rather than evasive about -- the challenges of KM.

The good news is that no one information discipline owns KM; each has roles to play. The articles, columns, and reviews in this issue of the Journal address various facets of KM, and they suggest how we can adapt, fashion new roles, and move ahead in an ever-broadening information management world view. What is the point of departure for this new paradigm? The paired list in the table above suggests both where we have been and where we need to go.

Being a knowledge manager may not be a comfortable role for all our readers, but it is the role of a professional journal to point to the way ahead -- and sometimes the way up as well. We hope this issue will challenge readers and serve these purposes.

Traditional Records Management     Emerging Knowledge Management

Transaction                        Transformation

Focus on physical records/         Content; higher-order knowledge
documents(e.g., folders, reels
of microfilm, magnetic tape)

Serving organizational units       Serving individuals, "knowledge
                                   workers"

Passive-reactive                   Dynamic, opportunistic

Focus on internal information      Focus on information of any kind
                                   from anywhere

Mandated by government, internal   Natural consequence of
policies, procedures               collaboration, communication

Files, boxes of folders, reels     "Information assets"
of magnetic tape

Information feeding into           Information feeding into
transaction decisions              transformational or innovation
                                   decisions

Conservation of resources          Significant investments in
(e.g., space, equipment,           knowledge-producing strategies
supplies)

Provide access to records we       Provide whatever information
manage for the owners of the       resources are needed by staff,
records                            customers, partners

Feed back - verify transaction     Feed forward - innovate, create