DATA
According to Jon-Arild Johannessen, Johan Olaisen, Bjorn Olsen; (2002) Data can be regarded as bites of potential information, which on its own does not provide any meaning, or “bits of information about particulars” expressed something similar: “Coded events operate as information in the communication process, not coded ones as disturbance (noise)”. It is only when an observer understands the code for the data, and when the data is systematized and structured that data becomes information for the observer.
INFORMATION
According to Jon-Arild Johannessen, Johan Olaisen, Bjorn Olsen; (2002) Information is defined as systematizing and structuring of data, given that the code is known and understood, it is referring back to a reference foundation.
KNOWLEDGE
According to Jon-Arild Johannessen, Johan Olaisen, Bjorn Olsen; (2002) Knowledge can be divided into two main categories: explicit (codified) and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge can be formulated relatively easily by means of words, numbers and symbols, and can thus be digitized. Hence, this type of knowledge can relatively be easily transferred to others by the use of, e.g. information and communication technology (ICT). Tacit knowledge is deeply rooted in action (practice) and is connected to concrete contexts. This type of knowledge is difficult to transfer to others as information and is difficult to digitize, i would define management as strategized processing of any function in an organised manner to gain the maximum output.( according to my article on Knowledge management )
My view on the relation between data, information and Knowledge
I accept with the statement above and also have experienced the same that data, information and knowledge are related to each others would like to consider the mortgage application processing in a bank as an example to make it more clear. in an mortgage process, the applicant submits the application and after which most of the people doesn’t know what happens actually, let me discuss it with regards to data, information and knowledge. the application as a scanned copy goes to the data entry department where a data entry operator enters all the data's in to the banks official data base from the submitted application and registers it with a unique number called as account number, here the employee dealing with the data transfer does not know what it is actually and how is it going to be processes in the future to sanction the mortgage, after the completion of this process the official application is ready in the data base, then goes in to the underwriter’s queue, here an underwriter picks this application for processing, this person also views the same details that was seen by the data entry operator where the script was just viewed as a data, but here with the underwriting team, the same data is being looked in to as the information of applicant(eg: the credit score, property value, applicants age, applicants income, applicants social status, number of dependents applicant has) who has applied for the mortgage, this doesn’t stops here just with the data being turned in to information , but the information viewed becomes knowledge when the underwriter starts assessing the application by analysing in all the required respective aspects according to the underwriting policies which makes the underwriter to sanction the mortgage loan, and this information is true to my knowledge with my experience as a mortgage underwriter...and i consider this would be a good example that co-relate data, information and knowledge.
Refference:
[1]Jon-Arild Johannessen,Johan Olaisen and Bjørn Olsen,2002:"Aspects of a systemic philosophy of knowledge: from social facts to data,information and knowledge"pp:2-15.
[2]http://madhusudhananvadivel.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Madhu,
ReplyDeleteThat was a nice real time example you gave regarding hw data becomes information which inturn becomes knowledge. The definitions that you have gave here were also good and the way you presented your ideas in your own perspective is awesum.
The first observation made when I looked at your article is the fact that some citations were made i.e. Jon-Arild Johannessen, Johan Olaisen, Bjorn Olsen; (2002) but none were referenced. You need to apply the 'Harvard referencing style' to your article to show your readers the root of where your dicussions were from.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, 'tacit knowledge is difficult to transfer and digitize’ but not impossible', as recognized by Johannessen et al (2002) who suggests that transfer of tacit to explicit is achievable by constant or continuous dialogue between both types of knowledge. This is why scholars of knowledge such as Nonaka have set out models to help transfer tacit knowledge to explicit, explicit to tacit and so forth (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995).
hi madhu
ReplyDeletei have read your article it was very interesting mainly the way you presented the article and the examples are good.
Hi mathu;
ReplyDeletegood real life example u given for DIK.the way of explanation is very good
It is good to see you talk about knowledge in deeper understanding... but in relation to
ReplyDeleteData - Information - Knowledge.... u have not explained what knowledge is...? For example: I think knowledge is what is created from the information... it triggers action or gives decision makers relative information to act upon...!
I think your example is good (I think it’s the bank you work for..?)... you give some good points about knowledge at the end... which you could have expanded on...?
;-)
Thank u very much guys for all ur comments, also iam about to post my new article soon, and i would expect you all to comment on that as well ....thanks
ReplyDelete