{"id":115,"date":"2009-01-14T07:52:18","date_gmt":"2009-01-14T15:52:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sabusense.com\/?page_id=115"},"modified":"2009-02-22T17:43:21","modified_gmt":"2009-02-23T01:43:21","slug":"how-was-this-site%e2%80%99s-knowledge-created","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/www.sabusense.com\/?page_id=115","title":{"rendered":"How was this site’s knowledge created?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u2026 “really great theory should always be embedded in practice.
\nIt should focus on the most challenging difficulties that people are encountering in practical settings.
\nAnd it has to be tested by the extent to which it actually offers people’s effectiveness in those practical settings.\u201d – John Dewey<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Creating the knowledge we then must manage.<\/strong>
\nIn management circles today Knowledge <\/em>Management, along with data-driven decisions and information<\/em> infrastructures, are popular solutions for many of the “symptoms” of an underlying problem infecting all of our modern organizations \u2013 the apparent inability to act on what already is known.<\/p>\n

But knowledge isn’t just data and information.\u00a0 Before knowledge can be managed it must be created.\u00a0 And that creation process requires the real time weaving together of data and information on the loom of practical experience<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The knowledge on this site meets that criterion.\u00a0 It is a product of observing — through a different lens<\/strong> \u2013 systemic<\/em> knowledge being created and managed over 10 years in a major American school district.\u00a0 Consequently, it taps into an inside view of how<\/em> knowledge creation happens, and more important, a developing understanding of an answer to why<\/em> it happens.\u00a0 Why, in a work setting that normally lacks the time and resources for learning, would people in an organization create and manage new knowledge together?\u00a0 And what are the principles that seem to drive that essential learning process?<\/p>\n

Back-story of a Why-asker<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

For those interested in the background that led to that opportunity, the following personal reflections attempt to capture the relevant experiences from the learning journey of a life-long why-asker<\/em> (who didn\u2019t succumb to the adult world’s insistence that he stop doing it at the age of four or five because they<\/em> lacked the time, and often the knowledge, to provide answers.)\u00a0\u00a0 As it has for others, that question has driven my learning throughout my life and career (and, I fear after I grew up, often made me annoying to others who needed to get on with their daily work.)<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, along the way, I\u2019ve discovered Why’s<\/em> primary contribution to thinking: — “sense-making<\/em>.”\u00a0 For me, that product created a level of understanding that could meaningfully frame and explain the more visible answers to the what’s<\/em> and how’s<\/em> needed by the people doing the work.<\/p>\n

And, more often than not, when that question failed to generate meaningful answers that made systemic sense<\/em>, it produced warning signals that something might be missing.\u00a0 It often reminded me of Sherlock Holmes situation when he solved one of his most puzzling cases by noting the significance of something that was absent — a dog not<\/strong> barking.\u00a0 That is, a natural<\/em> event not occurring that should have.\u00a0 And asking why<\/em>?<\/p>\n

Similarly, in education there seemed to be a hidden “thinking<\/em> problem” that was limiting understanding.\u00a0 The undetected problem:\u00a0 While what we accept as \u201cCommon Sense\u201d plays a key role in making sense of the work we call schooling, Common Sense no longer seems to work<\/em>. (see WHY IS SENSE-MAKING SO HARD<\/a>?)<\/p>\n

Still, it remains a critical component of the problem and the solution.\u00a0 And, paradoxically, it most influences thinking because it is at a level where we don’t<\/em> usually think about it.<\/p>\n

It was not their eyes that limited the systemic understanding of the “Blind Men” around the “Elephant,” but a blind spot in their thinking that made it difficult for them to notice there was a natural “system” already<\/em> there that gave meaning to their seemingly-separate parts.<\/p>\n

So my searching for “why” led to a realization that in order to “get out of the box” that framed our understandings of our organizational “elephants,” I needed to first go deeper in the box created by the maps of those “elephants” we stored in our heads. (see WHY ARE SABU AND THE ELEPHANT OUR METAPHORICAL GUIDES<\/a>?)<\/p>\n

Discovering the power and problems of mental “Maps”<\/strong><\/p>\n

I learned about the power of “Maps” from two experiences \u2013 one at the beginning of my career, and one much later with W. Edwards Deming.\u00a0 And then, over the last 10 years as I directly applied those learnings to understanding the work of a major US school system, I continually encountered the troubles they cause when they don\u2019t match the “Territory.” (See MAPPING THE NATURAL TERRITORY<\/a>)<\/p>\n

The power of maps<\/span><\/p>\n