Knowledge and change XII Nordic I&D Conference Aalborg 1-3.9.2004

1. Knowledge and changeXII Nordic I&D Conference Aalborg 1-3.9.2004 Climbing the knowledge pyramid. R&D programs at Oslo University College Dr. Robert W. Vaagan, Associate professorFaculty of Journalism, Library and Information Science

2. OUC and 3 new R&D programs • Oslo University College est. in 1994: 18 smaller state colleges merged, today Norway’s largest university college, with 10,600 students and a staff of 1,000. Currently 7 faculties and 4 centres, with 30 BA and 9 MA programs. OUC recently received accreditation of a doctoral program in the study of professions, and several other doctoral programs are in the pipeline. Possible university status within 5-8 years. • In June 2003, OUC board decided to establish three new R&D programs, to concentrate, strengthen and supplement existing R&D: • Communication, Culture and Learning (CCL) • Health Sciences and Social Welfare (HSSW) • Technology, Design and Environment (TDE) • 2003-2004: planning & design; 2005: operational • R&D programs broadly conceived, most of the 7 faculties and 4 centres will limit their participation to 1-2 programs. By bringing together 11 OUC units in 3 programs, R&D within programs will be multi- and interdisciplinary. This poses challenges.

3. Challenges • Although the programs are meant to be supplementary to existing R&D, they pose challenges. Needless to say, there are both enthusiasts and sceptics. Throughout OUC the new R&D programs will have an impact on the concept of knowledge (explicit and tacit forms), on knowledge creation and sharing. All 11 units need to reassess their current R&D resource use and priorities. Thematic foci and methodologies must be reviewed in order to formulate strategy and decide how to interact with the three new programs. To what extent should existing R&D continue under the faculty/centre mantles or be channeled into the new programs? Will fragmented organizational culture(s) and academic “silos” pose problems? Do blurred disciplinary boundaries weaken or strengthen involved disciplines? • Scientific staff who join the programs bring with them parts of their individual R&D resources, and in addition, financing will be sought from external sources. By exposing the programs to market forces, OUC has accepted that New Public Management is a priority for the present government. • What about the Faculty of Journalism, Library and Information Science and LIS as a discipline?

4. OUC unit and priority in relation to CCL module Education & didactics Cultural diversity ICT & media Youth in big cities Professional dialogues Faculty of Education High High Moderate High Moderate Faculty of Fine Art and Drama High Moderate High High Moderate Faculty of Journ., Library and Information Science Moderate Moderate High High High Centre for Multicultural and International Studies Moderate High Moderate High Moderate Faculty of Health Sciences Moderate Moderate High High Moderate Faculty of Nursing Moderate Moderate Moderate High High Faculty of Bus., Public Adm. and Social Work Low Low Low Low Low Faculty of Engineering Low Low Low Low Low CCL module

5. 3 critical and integrated aspects: Managing knowledge sharing Learning from knowledge sharing ICT support for knowledge sharing which in turn create 3 related traps: The management trap The individual learning trap The ICT trap Huysman, M. & de Wit, D. (2002) Knowledge Sharing in Practice. The Netherlands:Kluwer Knowledge sharing

6. Explicit or codified knowledge readily available in written form Converted from tacit knowledge Self-conscious Seen as objective Scientific, verifiable Tacit knowledge often concealed, implicit, oral May not be converted into explicit/codified form Not self-conscious Seen as subjective Postmodernist ?! (aesthetics and intuition as valid forms of knowledge) Instinct, intuition, talent, hunch, competency, dexterity, know-how, learning-by-doing Less scientific, less verifiable than explicit/codified form Explicit and tacit knowledge

7. Climbing the pyramid “Knowledge is not an easy term to define.  In fact epistemologists spend their entire lives trying to understand what it is to know something. I won't try to define knowledge […] for our purposes, knowledge takes information one step further than information.  I think of information as data that tells me about my business and how it functions” D. Marco (2003). ”A meta-data repository is the key to knowledge management”, The Data Administration Newsletter (TDAN.com)

8. “Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experiences, values, contextual information, expert insight, and grounded institution that provides an environment and framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, it often becomes imbedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms” Prusak, T.H & Davenport, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, No.5, Harvard School Press: Boston Foundations of knowledge management Knowledge as key organizational resource Organizational activity based on knowledge resources Influences on knowledge processing within an organization Holsapple. C.W (ed) (2003). Handbook on Knowledge Management, Vols.I_II, Berlin: Springer Knowledge management

9. LIS to the summit? • Information: ”data that has been processed into a meaningful form” • Knowledge (= understanding) : ”information evaluated and organized in the human mind so that it can be purposefully used” • Unclear conceptual distinction • Consequences for LIS climbing the pyramid? Feather, J. & Sturges, P. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, London:Routledge, pp. 244, 341

10. Information scienceand theory ”Information science has not reached a stage of development where it relies on a sufficiently sound theoretical and methodological base to be accepted as an important field of study. It is still looking for its identity […] Information science, perhaps, has waited too long to establish a sound theoretical basis for a cognitive-oriented information theory“ Wersig 2003

11. New directions in information theory • Constructivism (”information as the change in world representations” Wiener 1996, Buckland 1991, Cole 1994) • Systems theory (”information as a choice for something and thus against everything else that competes – Luhman 1988) • Action theory (”information as the value of knowledge in action” Roberts 1982, Kuhlen 1990, Rauch et al 1994) • Modernization theory (”information as the development of ordering structures within the ambiguous” Lyotard 1979, Wersig 1993) • Common core: complexity; an integrated theory of information may be a theory of complexity reduction (Wersig 2003)

12. LIS: towards the natural sciences? An underlying problem is that LIS – influenced esp. by information science and theory as well as by knowledge management - and in contrast with older disciplines like philosophy and psychology - tends to treat knowledge as a measurable unit. It thereby fails to adequately address vital qualities of knowledge (e.g. tacit knowledge), and contextual aspects of knowledge (direction, use, values, norms). This may change with new advances in IS and KM. Already, parts of LIS recognize that the social and ethical contexts and the use of information are decisive aspects of “information literacy” [i]. The LIS definition also says little about the genesis or creation of knowledge. Some of these shortcomings are linked with the uncertainty regarding the identity, purpose and direction of LIS [i] ACRL – Association of College and Research Libraries http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm#ildef See also Vaagan & Holm 2004 [i]

13. and away from the social sciences, humanities & arts? The classical librarian skills of cataloguing and classification have, in the information age and knowledge economy, been reinforced with theories and skills related especially to information and communication, information retrieval, information systems, computer science, knowledge management and web design. These place contemporary LIS increasingly in the natural sciences, and less in the social sciences, humanities & arts. For instance, the mathematical theory of information is more concerned with quantification of information, than with how meaning or content comes to be associated with a signal or message, which concerns philosophers, psychologists, sociologists and linguists (Audi 1999:434-435). Much will depend on developments in constructivism, systems theory, action theory and modernization theory, and a possibly integrated theory of complexity reduction (Wersig 2003). Yet looking ahead to what LIS may evolve into, it is difficult not to believe that developments in e.g. artificial intelligence (e.g. Kutz et al 2004) are likely to have more impact on LIS than philosophical enquiries (e.g. Mason 2003).

14. Summary and conclusion • Enhanced LIS understanding of knowledge also means closer consideration of knowledge perspectives in the social sciences, humanities and arts, including postmodernist views. At OUC, three new inter- and multidisciplinary R&D programs may invigorate and broaden individual, disciplinary and organizational understandings of knowledge, knowledge creation and sharing, and also make tacit knowledge more manifest. As a result, LIS at OUC may benefit. • As LIS attempts to ascend the knowledge pyramid, its understanding of the concept of knowledge relies esp. on information theory and science, and on business-oriented knowledge management techniques. Increasing reliance on the natural sciences at the expense of the social sciences, humanities & arts, may lead LIS to neglect some basic epistemological and ontological considerations about knowledge. Although new developments in information theory (constructivism, systems theory, action theory and modernization theory) concentrate on complexity reduction, a deeper understanding of how complexity relates to knowledge is required (Wersig 2003).

15. Thank you! E-mail: Robert-Wallace.Vaagan@jbi.hio.no