The Diagramming as Practice Framework

The D as Diagramming Project and Knowledge Curation

The above diagram is an integrated Framework for studying knowledge diagrams. This post is part of D as Diagramming project which aims to explore the power of diagrams and diagramming. What I really want to know is the value of diagrams for turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge in particular.

I started the D as Diagramming project on August 10, 2021. I’d like to close its Phase I with the Diagramming as Practice framework. This post aims to review the project and the framework.

Based on the project, I develop a mode for Knowledge Curation and an expanded canvas. These two practical tools are by-products of the D as Diagramming project.

Contents

1. The D as Diagramming Project (Phase I)
2. The Diagramming as Practice Framework
3. A Model of Knowledge Curation
4. A Canvas for Knowledge Curation Mapping
4.1 Theoretical Approaches
4.2 Conceptual Spaces
4.3 Practical Perspectives
4.4 Integrated Frameworks
4.5 Operational Heuristics
4.6 Practical Phenomena
5. Connecting Theory and Practice

1. The D as Diagramming Project (Phase I)

Diagram is one of my essential three knowledge units. I love to dwell in thought with diagramming. I even wrote a 108-page thesis that develops a theory about diagrams and diagramming in 2018. I consider two groups of ideas for my theory about diagrams. The first group is “meta-diagram, diagram, and diagram system” and the second group is “diagramming as an activity of knowing, theorizing and reflecting”.

The notion of “meta-diagram” considers a special type of diagram as an independent thing that doesn’t have to be a representation of an existing theory or model. For example, the 2x2 matrix diagram is a meta-diagram that doesn’t refer to any concrete theory or model such as BCG’s Growth-share matrix. A diagram system is a series of diagrams that share an intrinsic spatial logic and a visual identity.

The notion of “diagramming as an activity of knowing, theorizing and reflecting” adopts a process view to understand Diagrams. In other words, it is “becoming.” That means we can use diagrams as a tool for our thinking. We don’t need to consider all diagrams as final outcomes.

As a research project, the D as Diagramming project aims to explore the power of Diagrams and Diagramming. From the perspective of Activity Theory, Diagram means a tool while Diagramming means an activity. Thus, the D as Diagramming project is both about tools and activity. From the perspective of cognitive science, diagramming is about spatial cognition which is my favorite topic. From the perspective of Curativity Theory, Diagrams are knowledge containers for knowledge curation.

Moreover, what I really want to know is about the value of diagrams for turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. Thus, I set this goal as the present objective of the D as Diagramming research project.

I use three approaches for the project:

• Reflect on my own works
• Interview others
• Collect examples

This method could be considered roughly a triangular method. I learned the basic idea about Triangulating Data from Clay Spinuzzi’s book Topsight: A guide to studying, diagnosing, and fixing information flow in organization.

During the past several months, I interviewed four friends about their diagrams and their practices and wrote case study reports. I also designed many diagrams and wrote many articles about diagramming. In order to discover the relationship between diagrams and canvases, I turned my diagrams into canvases as experiments.

This wonderful work inspired me to develop an integrated Framework for studying knowledge diagrams.

2. The Diagramming as Practice Framework

In a previous article D as Diagramming: The Mind as Play Metaphor, I introduced an epistemological integrated framework for understanding mind, meaning, and experience. The framework uses four conceptual spaces to curate various theoretical approaches together.

The above diagram shows four conceptual spaces which are named the “Architecture” space, the “Relevance” space, the “Opportunity” space, and the “Activity” space. Each conceptual space refers to a set of similar theoretical approaches.

For the diagram framework, I selected the following practical perspectives:

• Cognitive Representation
• Cultural Significance
• Ecological Situation
• Mediating Instrument

I also adopted a meta-diagram “Stage” to represent the above four perspectives and other ideas. The core of the Stage meta-diagram is an Object of Knowing with three nested circles which represent nested layers: Layer 3 [Layer 2 (Layer 1)]. For example, I consider “Diagramming for Knowledge Curation” as an Object of Knowing for the D as Diagramming project, its nested conceptual structure can be understood as Explicit Knowledge [Diagramming (Tacit Knowledge)].

The second component of the Stage meta-diagram is five states. In fact, you can use Steps, Phases, Types, Categories, etc for your own frameworks. You can also use four, six, or other numbers. For the D as Diagramming project, I use five basic forms of social practices: Think, Count, Present, Talk, and Curate.

My primary interest is in developing knowledge frameworks. Though diagrams are used in various types of social practice and fields, I personally focus on knowledge building, academic creativity, epistemic development, and similar intellectual practices.

You can find more details about the framework here. Also, I wrote a series of articles to discuss the four perspectives. Below is a list of these articles:

• The Mind as Play Metaphor (Nov 9, 13 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 1 (Nov 12, 17 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 2 (Nov 19, 25 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 3A (Nov 29, 16 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 3B (Dec 2, 20 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 4A (Dec 9, 16 min read)
• An Integrated Framework for Studying Knowledge Diagrams — Part 4B (Dec 11, 14 min read)

The final outcome of the D as Diagramming project (Phase I) is great! It seems that I can edit a new book for the integrated framework.

3. A Model of Knowledge Curation

On Dec 11, 2021, I published the last article about the framework. On Dec 12, I reviewed the whole project and realized that there is a new model for curating many theories. Then, I designed the diagram below:

The model presents six types of “Objects of Curating” for a knowledge curation work:

• Theoretical Approaches
• Conceptual Spaces
• Practical Perspectives
• Integrated Frameworks
• Operational Heuristics
• Practical Phenomena

The diagram is adopted from a meta-diagram WXMY. In fact, I designed a similar framework called HERO U. See the diagram below.

The HERO U Framework presents six types of “Objects of Knowing”:

• mTheory: Meta-theory
• sTheory: Specific Theory
• aModel: Abstract Model
• cModel: Concrete Model
• dPractice: Domain Practice
• gPractice: General Practice

You can find more details in a previous article HERO U — A New Framework for Knowledge Heroes.

What’s the difference between the Model of Knowledge Curation and the HERO U framework since they use the same meta-diagram and they both aim to close the gap between Theory and Practice? The answer is that they work on two units of analysis.

• HERO U: The Landscape of One Theory
• Model of Knowledge Curation: The Landscape of Many Theories

On Aug 10, 2020, I published an article titled Activity U : The Landscape of Activity Theory (Part I). I used Activity Theory as an example to test the HERO U framework. The diagram below is called Activity U which presents several important works about Activity Theory at different levels.

The Model of Knowledge Curation jumps to a higher level and offers a solution for curating many theories together. For example, Activity Theory is considered a Theoretical Approach that is curated into the “Activity” Conceptual Space for the Diagramming as Practice framework.

4. A Canvas for Knowledge Curation Mapping

The above discussion offers a model of Knowledge Curation. Now let’s use the Diagramming as Practice framework as an example to explain the six types of Objects of Curating. In order to present the details of the case, I developed a canvas for mapping six types of Objects of Curating.

The above canvas uses six columns to display six types of Objects of Curating. The content of the canvas is adopted from the Diagramming as Practice framework. You can find more details from a list of articles in Part I.

4.1 Theoretical Approaches

Before 2014, I spent most of my spare time on digital nonprofit communities as a digital activist. From 2014 to 2015, I transformed my focus from nonprofit activities to theoretical learning. Since then, I have been spending most of my spare time learning ecological psychology, creativity research, and other related subjects. You can find more details from a previous article: D as Diagramming: Challenge as Opportunity.

I read academic books and papers about some disciplines and theoretical approaches. The above canvas lists a few examples which are related to four conceptual spaces:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Spatial Cognition Theories
• Conceptual Space Theory
• Construal Level Theory
• Cognitive Anthropology
• Cultural Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Phenomenological Sociology
• Social Representation Theory
• Activity Theory
• Social Practice Theories
• Ecological Psychology
• The Ecological Practice Approach

The primary theme of the D as Diagramming project is Diagram and Thought. I realized that most of the above theoretical resources are adopted from the field of psychological science. Thus, I also name the above canvas case study The Psychology of Diagramming and Beyond.

4.2 Conceptual Spaces

The notion of Conceptual Spaces is inspired by Peter Gardenfors’ 2004 book Conceptual Space: The Geometry of Thought. However, here I roughly use it to describe large cognitive containers for curating similar theoretical approaches together.

Is conceptual space a simple category of theoretical approaches?

Yes, it is. But, it is more than an objective label. For the model of knowledge curation, the notion of Conceptual Spaces is both objective and subjective. An important feature of Conceptual Spaces is connecting objective theoretical resources and subjective work experience.

As a lifelong thinker, I was satisfied with the epistemological framework as an outcome in the middle of 2017. Basically, the four conceptual spaces refer to four ways of connecting theory and practice.

• The “Architecture” conceptual space connects my work experiences in Information Architecture and my learning of cognitive science.
• The “Relevance” conceptual space connects my work experiences in advertising/media/marketing and my learning on semiotics/communication study/culture study.
• The “Activity” conceptual space connects my work experience about various domains and my learning of Activity Theory.
• The “Opportunity” conceptual space connects my life experience in my kids’ childhood and my learning of ecological psychology’s Affordance theory and my own work the Ecological Practice approach which was born in 2018.

Building and developing a Conceptual Space means Objective — Subjective knowledge curation. You need to connect established theories with your own personal life/work experience. There is a lot of work to do for this type of knowledge curation. You have to select theoretical approaches and identify the similarities and differences between various theories. You have to reflect on your own experience and imagine your future work in order to find relevant themes to curate theoretical approaches. Finally, you need to name your conceptual spaces.

For example, I have been reading books and papers about Activity Theory and Social Practice Theories for several years. Last year, I also worked on the Activity U project which focuses on curating the landscape of Activity Theory. The Activity U project is a knowledge project too.

Sometimes, you could give a working definition for a conceptual space. For example, I consider the Opportunity conceptual space as a super container to curate Environments, Situations, Affordances, Opportunities, Possible Actions, and Possible Practices together.

Possible Actions can be understood with two inseparable aspects:

a) Potentials which are offers by the environment or the situation, and

b) Capabilities, a skill, an ability, or knowledge that makes a person able to do a particular action.

The Potentials — Capabilities coupling echoes the Environment — Organisms coupling.

Some scholars use a similar approach to build toolkits for research. For example, Davide Nicolini introduces six different ways of theorizing practice in his 2013 book Practice Theory, Work, & Organization. However, their works are about Objective knowledge curation because they aim to produce public knowledge for academic researchers. My notion of Conceptual Space is for building Personal Epistemological Frameworks and personal epistemic development in general.

Conceptual Spaces are dynamic since a person could learn new theories and work on new projects. His experience of learning and working could change his conceptual spaces. These changes also impact his further learning and working.

4.3 Practical Perspectives

The purpose of Practical Perspectives is to bridge the gap between Epistemological Frameworks and Practical Frameworks. Since Epistemological Frameworks are formed by several Conceptual Spaces, they can’t directly apply to practical projects. For example, it is hard to directly use the concept “Architecture” to explain something because it is just a name of a set of similar theoretical resources.

We can select one or several theoretical concepts or principles from conceptual spaces and group them together as a practical framework. For example, I selected the following four perspectives to form the Diagramming as Practice framework:

• Cognitive Representation
• Cultural Significance
• Mediating Instrument
• Ecological Situation

We can use established theoretical concepts from a particular theoretical approach for Practical Perspectives. The “Mediating Instrument” perspective is directly adopted from Activity Theory. We can also use normal words to refer to a direction. For example, “Ecological Situation” is not a theoretical concept, but a normal word for highlighting the field of ecological psychology in the Opportunity conceptual space.

Why do we need a new term such as Practical Perspectives? Can we just use Concepts or Perspectives?

For the Model of Knowledge Curation, the term Practical Perspectives refers to the Approach — Application Knowledge Curation. This type of knowledge curation is about turning personal tacit knowledge into real-life work. For example, the D as Diagramming project is a real-life work about diagrams. The Diagramming as Practice framework is an application of theoretical knowledge and my tacit knowledge.

4.4 Integrated Frameworks

The outcome of the Approach — Application Knowledge Curation is practical frameworks. Sometimes, we can directly adopt one theoretical approach to develop a practical framework. If we use more than one theoretical approach to make a practical framework, then we could call it an integrated framework, or curated framework.

The D as Diagramming project (Phase I) produces many long articles, several case studies, and many ideas about diagrams and diagramming. I need a framework to help me make sense of such information and facts. The Diagramming as Practice framework weaves various ideas as a web of meaning.

• The Diagramming as Practice framework

In 2018, Clay Spinuzzi published a book titled Network: Theorizing knowledge works in telecommunications. In order to explain the dynamics of a telecommunications company's function, Clay Spinuzzi adopts Activity Theory and Actor—network Theory (ANT) to examine the networks of activity behind the company. We can roughly understand his framework for the book is an integrated framework.

4.5 Operational Heuristics

If you read my articles about the Diagramming as Practice framework, you will find many micro-thinking tools such as Principle, Typology, Spectrum, Formula, Canvas, etc. I use them to organize my writing and the content of my articles.

For the Model of Knowledge Curation, I called these micro thinking tools Operational Heuristics. Below is a list of Operational Heuristics I made during the process of writing articles about the Diagramming as Practice framework.

• A Principle for Designing Diagrams and Canvases
• A Typology of Relevances
• The Means-End Spectrum
• The Past—Present Evolution
• The Part-Whole Curativity
• The Ambiguity — Precision Dynamics
• The Opportunity Formula
• Typology of Space Affordances
• The Opportunity Space

As a bridge between perspectives and phenomena, Operational Heuristics refer to the Explanation — Operation Knowledge Curation. While Perspectives are great for guiding explanations, it is effective and convenient to use abstract perspectives if we have tools to model the structure of such explanations. Heuristics offer such tools at the operation level. Thus, turning perspectives into heuristics means the Explanation — Operation Knowledge Curation.

Though I developed the above Operational Heuristics for the Diagramming as Practice framework, some heuristics could be detached from the framework and attached to other practical frameworks. For example, though the Means—End Spectrum (see the diagram below) is all about diagrams and thought, I can adopt its ideas to other types of Things. In other words, the Means—End Spectrum could be used as a general thinking tool.

In fact, the Typology of Space Affordances is a general thinking tool. It can be directly used for other types of things.

4.6 Practical Phenomena

The final Object of Curating is Practical Phenomena which refers to various topics about diagrams and diagramming. See the list below.

• Diagram and Thought
• Visualization and Conceptualization
• Misdiagramming
• Diagrams and Knowledge Frameworks
• Diagramming and Relevances
• Diagrams and Symbolic Invention
• Diagrams and Situational Events
• Diagrams and Knowledge Work
• Diagram-in-use
• Meta-diagram
• Sub-diagram
• Diagram Network
• Diagram Blending
• Diagrams and Environments
• Diagrams and Languages
• Diagrams and Canvases
• Diagrams and Knowledge Branding
• Diagram Digitization
• Diagrams and Digital Applications
• Productization of Diagrams

The above topics are discovered from my case studies and my own work experience. For example, Meta-diagram and Diagram Blending are used to describe my work about a series of meta-diagrams. The Life-as-Activity framework (v2.0) was developed with the Diagram Blending method. See the diagram below and the original article.

You can also find more examples of Diagram Blending and Diagram Networks from previous articles such as The iART Diagram Network, Tripartness and Diagram Blending, and The Value-fit Framework and Canvas.

5. Connecting Theory and Practice

The Theory-Practice Gap is an important issue in a wide range of disciplines including education, organization learning and development, community building, academic development, enterprise R&D, professional service firms (PSFs), etc.

If we can find a good solution to close the Theory-Practice Gap, then we can improve existing social systems of knowledge production, knowledge application, and knowledge management at the individual level and the collective level.

I have been thinking and working on developing such a solution for many years. As a serial creator and a lifelong thinker, I am passionate about intellectual development and life reflection. Initially, I was influenced by Chris Argyris’ Action Science and Donald Schön’s Theory in Practice and The Reflective Practitioner. In 2014, I started learning Ecological Psychology, Activity Theory, and other theoretical approaches.

At the end of 2017, I wrote a series of articles on the relationship between Knowledge and Personal Development and developed a framework called Dynamic System of Personal Knowing. You can find more details from a previous article: D as Diagramming: Challenge as Opportunity.

In 2019, I found my own approach to the Theory-Practice Gap. From Sept 2018 to March 2019, I wrote a book titled Curativity: The Ecological Approach to Curatorial Practice. The book presents the Curativity Theory with a theoretical foundation Ecological Practice approach.

After March 2019, I continuously worked on revising Curativity and developing the Ecological Practice Approach as a new project. For the direction of Curativity Theory, I am looking for practical applications, for example:

• Knowledge Curation
• Action Curation
• Life Curation
• Platform Curation

I have written a chapter discussing knowledge curation in the book Curativity. For academic knowledge curation, I mentioned Dean Keith Simonton’s chance-configuration theory, Victor Kaptelinin and Bonnie A. Nardi’s scientific curation case study “curation at Ajaxe”, and qualitative research. For practical knowledge curation, I focus on Cognitive Container since Container is a core concept of Curativity Theory.

Books and courses are typical cognitive containers, however, there are more types of cognitive containers. I highlighted five types of Cognitive Containers:

• Knowledge Card
• Knowledge Framework
• Knowledge Diagram and Chart
• Knowledge Workshop
• Knowledge Sprint

It is not an accurate classification, but a rough recommendation. Also, I suggested that we not only adopt existing types of cognitive containers but also create new types of cognitive containers. Actually, this is the essential point of the Curation Theory. We are shaped by containers and we can make containers too.

The core idea of Curativity Theory is turning pieces into a meaningful whole. For abstract things such as Knowledge, we need to build two types of containers, one is an abstract container while the other is a concrete container. This notion is the starting point of building a solution to close the gap between Theory and Practice.

In 2020, I worked on the Activity U project which is a concrete container while the HERO U framework is an abstract container.

In 2021, I worked on the D as Diagramming project which is a concrete container while the Model of Knowledge Curation is an abstract container.

The HERO U framework is about curating one theory while the Model of Knowledge Curation is about curating many theories. Both two frameworks are about Individual Knowledge Curation.

In 2022, I’d like to explore Collective Knowledge Curation with you. Now we have the canvas of Knowledge Curation which is an abstract container, I’d like to invite you to join the journey.

You are most welcome to connect via the following social platforms:

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliverding
Twitter: https://twitter.com/oliverding
Polywork: https://www.polywork.com/oliverding
Boardle: https://www.boardle.io/users/oliver-ding

License

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License. Please click on the link for details.