Personal knowledge management (PKM) is a collection of processes that a person uses to gather, classify, store, search, retrieve and share knowledge in their daily activities (Grundspenkis 2007) and the way in which these processes support work activities (Wright 2005). It is a response to the idea that knowledge workers need to be responsible for their own growth and learning (Smedley 2009). It is a bottom-up approach to knowledge management (KM) (Pollard 2008).
Contents
History and background
Although as early as 1998 Davenport wrote on the importance to worker productivity of understanding individual knowledge processes (cited in Zhang 2009), the term personal knowledge management appears to be relatively new. Its origin can be traced in a working paper by Frand & Hixon (1999).
PKM integrates personal information management (PIM), focused on individual skills, with knowledge management (KM) in addition to input from a variety of disciplines such as cognitive psychology, management and philosophy (Pauleen 2009). From an organizational perspective, understanding of the field has developed in light of expanding knowledge about human cognitive capabilities and the permeability of organizational boundaries. From a metacognitive perspective, it compares various modalities within human cognition as to their competence and efficacy (Sheridan 2008). It is an underresearched area (Pauleen 2009). More recently researches have been conducted to understand "the potential role of Web 2.0 technologies for harnessing and managing personal knowledge" (Razmerita, Kirchner & Sudzina 2009).
Models
Dorsey (2001) identified information retrieval, assessment and evaluation, organization, analysis, presentation, security, and collaboration as essential to PKM (cited in Zhang 2009).
Wright's model involves four interrelated domains: analytical, information, social and learning. The analytical domain involves competencies such as interpretation, envisioning, application, creation and contextualization. The information dimension comprises the sourcing, assessment, organization, aggregation, and communication of information. The social dimension involves finding and collaborating with people, development of both close networks and extended networks, and dialogue. The learning dimension entails expanding pattern recognition and sensemaking capabilities, reflection, development of new knowledge, improvement of skills, and extension to others. This model stresses the importance of both bonding and bridging networks (Wright 2007).
In Nonaka and Takeuchi's SECI model of knowledge creation (see under knowledge management), knowledge can be tacit or explicit, with the interaction of the two resulting in new knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). Smedley has developed a PKM model based on Nonaka and colleagues' model in which an expert provides direction and a community of practice provides support for personal knowledge creation (Smedley 2009). Trust is central to knowledge sharing in this model. Nonaka has recently returned to his earlier work in an attempt to further develop his ideas about knowledge creation (Nonaka & von Krogh 2009)
Personal knowledge management can also be viewed along two main dimensions, personal knowledge and personal management (Zhang 2009). Zhang has developed a model of PKM in relation to organizational knowledge management (OKM) that considers two axes of knowledge properties and management perspectives, either organizational or personal. These aspects of organizational and personal knowledge are interconnected through the OAPI process (organizationalize, aggregate, personalize, and individualize), whereby organizational knowledge is personalized and individualized and personal knowledge is aggregated and operationalized as organizational knowledge (Zhang 2009).
Criticism
It is not clear whether PKM is anything more than a new wrapper around personal information management (PIM). William Jones argued that only personal information as tangible resource can be managed, whereas personal knowledge cannot (Jones 2010). Dave Snowden has asserted that most individuals cannot manage their knowledge in the traditional sense of "managing" and has advocated thinking in terms of sensemaking rather than PKM (Snowden & Pauleen 2008). Knowledge is not solely an individual product—it emerges through connections, dialog and social interaction (see Sociology of knowledge). However, in Wright's model, PKM involves the application to problem solving of analytical, information, social, and learning dimensions, which are interrelated (Wright 2007), and so is inherently social.
An aim of PKM is "helping individuals to be more effective in personal, organisational and social environments" (Pauleen 2009, p. 221), often through the use of technology such as networking software. It has been argued, however, that equation of PKM with technology has limited the value and utility of the concept (e.g. Pollard 2008, Snowden & Pauleen 2008).
In 2012, Mohamed Chatti introduced the PKN model to KM as an alternative perspective on PKM, based on the concepts of personal knowledge network and knowledge ecology (Chatti 2012).
Skills
Skills associated with personal knowledge management include:
Tools
Some organizations are introducing PKM "systems" with some or all of four components:
PKM has also been linked to these tools:
Other useful tools include Open Space Technology, cultural anthropology, stories and narrative, mindmaps, concept maps and eco-language, and single frames and similar information visualization techniques. Individuals use these tools to capture ideas, expertise, experience, opinions or thoughts, and this "voicing" will encourage cognitive diversity and promote free exchanges away from a centralized policed knowledge repository. The goal is to facilitate knowledge sharing and personal content management.