Open in app

Sign in

Write

Sign in

Mastodon

Mapping Strategic Moves #4: Exploring Knowledge Engagement

Oliver Ding
CALL4
Published in
23 min readSep 19, 2024

--

Using the House of Project Engagement as a Strategic Map

This is part of the series of Mapping Strategic Moves.

In this fourth case study, I will utilize the House of Project Engagement as a strategic map to reflect on the journey of Exploring Knowledge Engagement.

In September 2022, I reviewed a four-project creative journey centered on Activity Theory and identified “Knowledge Engagement” as the primary theme. Drawing on the “Mediating Action” model, I adopted ideas from other Activity-based theoretical approaches and developed a new diagram to represent this Journey. More details can be found in Mapping Thematic Journey (Engaging with Activity Theory, 2020–2022).

Why reflect on this journey again?

I revisited this journey as part of a case study for the Strategic Moves project to conduct a deeper analysis through the lens of the House of Project Engagement, using a diagramming exercise called Mapping Strategic Moves. While the earlier reflection focused on four projects about Activity Theory, this case study expands the scope to encompass a broader range of projects and social landscapes, exploring the theme of Knowledge Engagement over a longer period, from 2020 to 2024.

This broader reflection allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the evolving dynamics within the Knowledge Engagement journey.

The House of Project Engagement

Designed as a Map, the House of Project Engagement uses a “Museum” metaphor to represent space. The House is organized into 12 thematic rooms, with each room representing a distinct type of social landscape. Together, these rooms depict the following themes:

  • Before
  • Role Models
  • Ideas
  • Possible Project
  • Meet with Others
  • Actual Project
  • Settings
  • Supportive Platform
  • Public Square
  • Network of Project
  • Conflict
  • After

For more information, please refer to the following link:

The Journey of Exploring with Knowledge Engagement

“Knowledge Engagement” serves as a creative theme that has evolved over time, acquiring different meanings and being associated with various theoretical frameworks. It has expanded into a network of related themes, including Knowledge Curation, Knowledge Creation, Knowledge Center, Knowledge Enterprise, and Knowledge Strategy. This case study highlights the open-ended and uncertain nature of Thematic Exploration as a creative journey.

  • June 2, 2022 — I prefer to use “Knowledge Engagement” to describe the “people—knowledge” relationship. For me, “Knowledge Management” suggests a perspective where knowledge is treated as an entity or substance — a thing. In contrast, “Knowledge Engagement” emphasizes a process view, focusing on the dynamic interaction between people and knowledge.
  • September 15, 2022 — The term “Knowledge Engagement” was influenced by the Project Engagement approach (v2.1). It can be used to describe any knowledge-related project, broadening the scope of engagement in the knowledge field.
  • March 23, 2023 — While the Project Engagement approach is Activity-based, it doesn’t fully capture the complexity and dynamics of specific knowledge projects. I began using “Knowledge Engagement” more loosely to encompass both Knowledge Creation and Knowledge Curation, laying the foundation for a new conceptual model.
  • April 19, 2023 — I associated the concept of “World of Activity” from Creative Life Theory with the theme of Knowledge Engagement.

By 2024, my focus has shifted toward developing the model of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise and the theme of Knowledge Strategy.

References:

Mapping Strategic Moves

Let’s explore the strategic moves I made while engaging with Activity Theory from 2020 to 2024 through the lens of the House of Project Engagement.

I identified 26 key movements throughout the journey by applying the House of Project Engagement. Each move represents a distinct aspect of the social landscape within the knowledge engagement process, highlighting the interplay between mental exploration and social exploration.

1

Thematic Room: Before

In 2019, I completed a book draft titled Curativity: The Ecological Approach to General Curation Practice. Knowledge Curation is a case study of Curativity Analysis in the book.

2

Thematic Room: Ideas

In mid-2020, I searched for new project ideas. A diagram, “When Theory Meets Practice,” created in March 2020, caught my attention in May 2020.

3

Thematic Room: Possible Project

In May 2020, I modified the diagram and developed the HERO U framework.

4

Thematic Room: Actual Project

In September 2020, I started the Activity U project as a Knowledge Curation initiative. Early outcomes included two book drafts: Activity U (2020) and Project-oriented Activity Theory (2021).

5

Thematic Room: Public Square

While working on the Activity U project, I discovered that Activity Theory is not one theory, but a group of theories, sharing a set of fundamental principles. My writing featured notable Activity Theorists as knowledge heroes, each uniquely engaging with the theoretical tradition, offering insights into how they found their knowledge niches in a competitive field.

6

Thematic Room: Conflict

I’ve pondered the theory-practice gap for years. On October 1, 2020, I wrote a post reflecting on the first year of CALL (Creative Action Learning Lab), claiming that Activity Theory serves as a learning object for transdisciplinary thinking, bridging academic and non-academic knowledge.

7

Thematic Room: After

From September 2020 to March 2021, I wrote three book drafts: Activity U, Project-oriented Activity Theory, and Platform for Development. In May 2021, I developed the Career-fit framework, discovering opposite themes like “Concept vs. Diagram,” representing cross-domain cognitive experiences.

8

Thematic Room: Public Square

In April 2021, my friends organized a two-month online discussion program about The Whole Earth Catalog (W.E.C.). I was invited as a guest and researcher, contributing to discussions across Milanote, WeChat, and various video platforms.

9

Thematic Room: Actual Project

Inspired by discussions about the HERO U framework during the program, I drafted a book reflecting on writing three book drafts. Titled The ECHO Way, it emphasized connecting theory with practice.

10

Thematic Room: Settings

In March 2021, I completed Platform for Development: The Ecology of Adult Development in the 21st Century and introduced the concept of Supportance. To test this framework, I conducted empirical research on virtual whiteboards, resulting in the Once Upon A Whiteboard project in April 2022.

11

Thematic Room: Actual Project

The Once Upon A Whiteboard project spurred 10 sub-projects. One notable outcome was my return to the D as Diagramming project (August–December 2021), where I explored the power of diagrams in turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. This led to two book drafts: Diagramming as Practice and Diagram Blending.

12

Thematic Room: Meet with Others

During the D as Diagramming project, I connected with creative professionals on LinkedIn who created knowledge diagrams and canvases, which inspired my work.

13

Thematic Room: Possible Project

At the end of Diagramming as Practice, I designed the Opportunity Space Canvas to explore diagram productization. This inspired the Thematic Space Canvas in January 2022.

14

Thematic Room: Actual Project

From January to May 2022, I used the Thematic Space Canvas to develop a series of canvases and wrote Knowledge Discovery: Developing Tacit Knowledge with Thematic Space Canvas.

15

Thematic Room: Meet with Others

From January to June 2022, I worked on a network of projects centered around the Life-as-Project approach. During this time, I connected with professionals on Linkedin. While my focus was on individual tacit knowledge, personal innovation, and adult development, many of these professionals encouraged me to explore broader social contexts, such as innovation ecosystems.

16

Thematic Room: Possible Project

Originally, I intended to launch the Activity U Project (II) in October 2021 but created a new website with a new name, Activity Analysis, instead. I delayed the launch due to my involvement in the D as Diagramming project.

17

Thematic Room: Ideas

On Jan 2, 2022, I had a 71-minute talk with a friend of mine. At the end of the talk, I told him that I’d like to run the Activity Analysis website as a Knowledge Center. In May 2022, I published an article to share a model of Building Knowledge Enterprise.

On January 2, 2022, after a conversation with a friend, I decided to run the Activity Analysis website as a Knowledge Center. In May 2022, I introduced the Building a Knowledge Enterprise model, where the Knowledge Center serves as a core component.

18

Thematic Room: Network of Projects

On June 2, 2022, I launched Curativity Center and began the Knowledge Center project, with Building Knowledge Enterprise as its core activity. As a meta-center, Curativity Center aims to build a supportive system, providing support to other knowledge centers.

19

Thematic Room: Ideas

In September 2022, the theme of ‘Knowledge Engagement’ emerged as I mapped out a creative journey. I selected four projects related to Activity Theory from 2020 to 2022 and viewed them as part of this journey. Realizing that I had engaged in both Knowledge Curation and Knowledge Creation, I chose ‘Knowledge Engagement’ as the central theme for this process.

20

Thematic Room: Possible Project

From January to March 2023, I developed several versions of the Knowledge Engagement framework. However, I am not satisfied with them, as I feel they lack flexibility, primarily because they were developed using a categorical approach.

21

Thematic Room: Actual Project

Between January and April 2023, I studied Ping-keung Lui’s Gaze, Actions, and the Social World (2017), producing 228 pages of notes. This research led to several frameworks forming Creative Life Theory (v2.0). These notes became a book draft, Knowledge Engagement: Knowledge Center and Creative Life Theory (April 2023), followed by the English draft Creative Life Theory: Building A Knowledge Enterprise (December 2023).

22

Thematic Room: Settings

In Jan 2023, I launched Thematic Analysis Learning Engagement (TALE) as a new knowledge center to host the Thematic Engagement framework. Initially, the primary activity of TALE was creating thematic cards to encourage creative projects. Later, it became a creative accelerator, inspiring knowledge projects around Early Discovery and Concept Development.

23

Thematic Room: Actual Project

TALE Center inspired several knowledge projects, leading to book drafts such as Product Engagement, Thematic Exploration, Grasping the Concept, Mental Moves, and Social Moves, which comprise the Aspects of Early Discovery series.

24

Thematic Room: Supportive Platform

From September to December 2023, I collaborated on building a joint knowledge center with a friend. This collaboration sparked new ideas, including the concept of a “Mental Platform,” which developed into the Evolving Concept System model in November 2023. It evolved further into the Evolving Knowledge Enterprise model in April 2024.

25

Thematic Room: After

In May 2024, I concluded the Knowledge Center project and the Value Circle project, recognizing the journey as a creative exploration of the theory-practice connection. This reflection resulted in the book draft Center, Circle, and Genidentity, which incorporated the Evolving Knowledge Enterprise model into a framework for developing General Genidentity Theory.

26

Thematic Room: After

From May to August 2024, I refined the Project Engagement approach (v3.1). In September 2024, I returned to the Strategic Moves project, launching a new theme, “Knowledge Strategy,” which focuses on strategies for knowledge-related activities.

Here are more details about some strategic moves within the journey of exploring knowledge engagement:

  • Move 2 / Move 6: When Theory Meets Practice
  • Move 7: Concept vs. Diagram
  • Move 10 / Move 11: The Once Upon A Whiteboard Project
  • Move 13 / Move 14: The Thematic Space Canvas
  • Move 17: The Model of Building Knowledge Enterprise
  • Move 20: The Knowledge Engagement Framework (v4)
  • Move 24: The Model of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise

Move 2 / Move 6: When Theory Meets Practice

In 2019, I created the diagram “When X Meets Y” (WXMY). In March 2020, I applied it to several issues, generating domain-specific diagrams.

On March 7, I came up with the idea of Re-Engagement, and by March 18, I had developed the Re-Engagement framework using the WXMY diagram. The process and outcomes were unexpected and exciting. This led me to dedicate the following week to exploring the WXMY diagram further across different ideas.

March 22: Applied to “Ecological Structure”.
March 22: Applied to “Double Grid-Group”
March 23: Applied to “Boundary Innovation”
March 26: Applied to “Platform Container”
March 26: Applied to “Theory — Practice Coupling”
March 27: Applied to “Life Container”

This was a transformative experience. During this week, I was deeply engaged in visualizing complex, abstract ideas through the WXMY diagram. It felt like a tipping point for the diagram’s development.

In April 2020, I wrote a 108-page case study thesis, reflecting on my learning journey through various theories such as Activity Theory and Ecological Psychology. The thesis also traced how these theories shaped my digital product practice.

This effort to bridge the gap between THEORY and PRACTICE echoes Move 6, which highlights the tension between the two. On October 1, 2020, I wrote a review of the first year of CALL (Creative Action Learning Lab) and recognized Activity Theory as a learning object for Transdisciplinary Thinking which — connecting knowledge from academic and non-academic domains alike.

This was the seed of Exploring Knowledge Engagement.

References:

Move 7: Concept vs. Diagram

From September 2020 to March 2021, I wrote three book drafts: Activity U, Project-oriented Activity Theory, and Platform for Development. In May 2021, I developed the Career-fit framework, discovering opposite themes like “Concept vs. Diagram,” reflecting cross-domain cognitive experiences.

In a 2021 article titled Personal Innovation as Career-fit, I used the Activity U project to illustrate the Career-fit framework and introduced the Echozone diagram.

The diagram below represents the Echozone and includes notes that explain the alignment between career themes and developmental projects within the Activity U project.

The diagram demonstrates the fit between two pairs of opposite themes. The “Theory vs. Practice” fit, in particular, is described through three movements:

  • Practice-based Reflection: Building rough models intuitively.
  • Theory-based Reflection: Improving models with theoretical resources.
  • Theory-Practice Dialogue: Turning models into frameworks and testing them with case studies.

The article Platform Innovation as Concept-fit provides a practical example of these three steps.

My work experience spans both design and writing, allowing me to switch between verbal and visual thinking. I enjoy developing new abstract concepts and designing innovative concrete diagrams. I can move fluidly between high-level strategic ideas and pixel-level interface design.

Knowledge frameworks consist of both concepts and diagrams. Over time, my focus shifted towards Knowledge Curation, treating knowledge frameworks as my creative outputs.

The “Concept vs. Diagram” fit is captured by a simple formula:

  • Concept + Diagram = Knowledge Framework

This formula is defined by the HERO U framework and has guided much of my creative work in developing theoretical frameworks.

This fit is a significant theme in my journey of exploring knowledge engagement. I’ve since worked on several related projects and written additional book drafts on the subject.

References:

Move 10 / Move 11: The Once Upon A Whiteboard Project

In March 2021, I wrote Platform for Development: The Ecology of Adult Development in the 21st Century and introduced the concept of Supportance. Supportance signified a major milestone, marking the evolution of the Ecological Practice approach from a curated toolkit into an original theoretical framework.

In April 2022, I shifted my focus from theoretical development to empirical research to test the Ecological Practice approach and its sub-frameworks.

For my first empirical research project, I chose to study Virtual Whiteboards and related platform-based practices.

Why?

My primary interest lies in exploring Virtual Space Affordance. Borrowing the concept of Affordance from James Gibson’s Ecological Psychology, which refers to “what environment offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill.” I coined the term Virtual Space Affordance to study Virtual Whiteboards as a new environment.

In April 2022, the Once Upon A Whiteboard was born. It is an independent, lean study with a clear goal of testing my theoretical approaches and frameworks, though the plan remained fluid. I focused on matching theoretical frameworks with platforms and researching real-world cases one at a time.

This project led to Move 11 — the D as Diagramming project.

The Once Upon A Whiteboard project resulted in 10 sub-projects. A key outcome was my decision to revisit the D as Diagramming project. From August to December 2021, I worked on D as Diagramming to explore the potential of diagrams in turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. The result was two book drafts: Diagramming as Practice and Diagram Blending.

References:

Move 13 / Move 14: The Thematic Space Canvas

The Thematic Space Canvas was inspired by two ideas: the Opportunity Space canvas and the concept of Conceptual Space.

The canvas was initially designed in December 2021 to explore the productization of diagrams and became part of a book draft titled Diagramming as Practice.

During this period, I also developed a model of Knowledge Curation and created a corresponding canvas to further develop the Diagramming as Practice framework.

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

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

The image above represents the Knowledge Curation Mapping canvas, using the Diagramming as Practice framework as an example.

The term Conceptual Spaces was inspired by Peter Gardenfors’ 2004 book Conceptual Space: The Geometry of Thought. However, I adopted the term loosely to describe large cognitive containers for curating related theoretical approaches.

I published the model and canvas on Dec 16, 2021, but soon realized I needed a new term to replace Conceptual Spaces.

  • First, my usage diverged from Gardenfors’ original meaning of Conceptual Spaces.
  • Second, I was already using the term “theme” in projects like Theme U, Theme Plus, and Themes of Practice. It made sense to use Thematic Space for both the model and the canvas.

In the knowledge curation model, Thematic Spaces are both objective and subjective. An important feature of Thematic Spaces is connecting objective theoretical resources and subjective work experience.

From the perspective of Curativity Theory, building and developing a Thematic Space means the Objective — Subjective knowledge curation.

This process requires linking established theories to your personal life and work experience. It’s an intensive endeavor: you must select relevant theoretical approaches, identify similarities and differences between them, reflect on your own experiences, and envision your future work to find relevant themes. Ultimately, you name and shape your Thematic Spaces.

Thematic Spaces are dynamic, evolving as you learn new theories and take on new projects. As your experience changes, so do your thematic spaces, which, in turn, influence your ongoing learning and work.

The Thematic Space Canvas was designed to provide a structured solution for exploring both the structure and dynamics of these spaces.

This has been a crucial tool in my journey of exploring knowledge engagement.

From Jan to May 2022, I used the Thematic Space Canvas to develop a series of canvases and wrote a book draft titled Knowledge Discovery: Developing Tacit Knowledge with Thematic Space Canvas.

In 2023, I used this canvas to guide several knowledge projects, which also led to the creation of the Grasping the Concept model and several case studies that year.

References:

Move 17: The Model of Building a Knowledge Enterprise

On January 13, 2022, I designed the diagram below to visualize the concept of a “Knowledge Center”, which I had discussed with a friend on January 2.

The diagram represents an imagined project along with a new concept introduced on that day:

  • An imagined project: the Activity Analysis project
  • A new concept: Knowledge Center

Later, I realized this could serve as a general model for building a knowledge enterprise. The model aims to answer a related question:

How to grow a knowledge enterprise?

The answer unfolds through a three-phase path:

  • Phase 1: Every Knowledge Enterprise is founded on a unique theme, developed by its founders through a distinct perspective.
  • Phase 2: A knowledge center is a collective project aimed at developing a specific body of knowledge. A “center” should have its own uniqueness in order to establish its own identity and theme. Otherwise, there is no need to build a “center”.
  • Phase 3: The distinction between a Knowledge Center and a Knowledge Community lies in scope and scale. A knowledge center may only have less than 15 members, while a knowledge community can consist of thousands.

The model draws inspiration from Project-oriented Activity Theory, with each phase representing a focus of development. The concept of three-phase development stems from the diagram, one of a series featured in the book, used to explain the idea of “culture” within the context of Project-oriented Activity Theory. It connects the individual mind (Idea) and collective theme (Zeitgeist) through collective projects (Concept), offering a broader perspective.

This was the starting point of both the concept of “Activity Analysis” and the concept of “Knowledge Center”. From May 2022 to Dec 2023, these concepts evolved from simple models into fully developed frameworks along two parallel trajectories:

  • The Developmental Trajectory of “PRACTICE”
  • The Developmental Trajectory of “THEORY”

During this period, I worked on establishing a network of knowledge centers. However, the three-phase model did not provide enough operational insights for my needs. As a result, I had to develop more concrete models to navigate my challenges, eventually leading to the creation of the Value Circle Model.

Looking back on the journey from 2019 to 2023, we can see the developmental trajectory of “PRACTICE” as outlined in the diagram below.

The five movements in the model represent key milestones in this journey, illustrated through the example of the Curativity Center:

  • March 2019: Single Theme (the theme of Curativity and Curativity Theory)
  • June 2020: Single Project (the Knowledge Curation project)
  • June 2022: Single Knowledge Center (Curativity Center)
  • September 2022: Single Knowledge Enterprise (the Curativity knowledge enterprise)
  • September 2023: Single Value Circle (a network of knowledge centers)

References:

Move 20: The Knowledge Engagement Framework (v4)

on Jan 31, 2023, I introduced a diagram titled Dimensions of Knowledge Engagement. Initially, I envisioned a 3D model of the World of Activity for Knowledge Engagement, featuring three key dimensions:

  • Transdisciplinary dimension
  • Interdisciplinary dimension
  • Temporal dimension

As the framework evolved, I expanded it to six dimensions. On February 2, 2023, I made version 2, which incorporated seven dimensions. On February 16, 2023, a new version emerged with an additional section on objectification.

On March 23, 2023, I created version 4, consisting of 6 sections and 18 dimensions. It became clear that I needed to elaborate on the underlying concepts of these sections for the readers. Eventually, I made a new framework for Knowledge Engagement.

  • Potential: Mental Elements
  • Focus: Knowledge (e.g., Concept, Theory, Framework, Center, etc)
  • Thematic Space: A creative space framed by a theme
  • Actor: A person (sociologists often refer to a person as an “Actor”)
  • Create: Making concrete things to represent abstract knowledge
  • Curate: Organizing pieces of knowledge-related experience into a meaningful mental element

The term “Mental Elements” is borrowed from Dean Keith Simonton’s Chance-configuration theory (Scientific Genius,1988). I use it to describe ideas, insights, sparks of inspiration, etc. In the Knowledge Engagement model, “Mental Elements” are seen as “Potential” resources for knowledge development.

The term “Focus” is inspired by Activity Theory’s concept of “Object.” In this model, “Focus” refers to the things we work on, such as Concepts, Approaches, Frameworks, Papers, Books, Workshops, Knowledge Centers, Knowledge Communities, etc.

“Thematic Space” is a concept from the Ecological Practice approach, describing a special type of Container: Cognitive Container, where knowledge is framed by a theme.

The terms “Create” and “Curate” are inspired by the dual processes of Knowledge Creation and Knowledge Curation. However, in this framework, they refer to two distinct types of actions:

  • Create: Making concrete things to represent abstract knowledge
  • Curate: Organizing pieces of knowledge-related experience into a meaningful mental element

Moreover, if we connect the Knowledge Engagement model with the Creative Life Curation framework, the “Curate” action resonates “Subjectification / Experience 1,” while the “Create” action aligns with “Objectification / Experience 2.”

References:

Move 24: The Model of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise

On November 4, 2023, I created a diagram to explore the process of Developing a Concept System. In the stage of Continuous Objectification, the primary focus is on the development of a Concept System, and the main activity revolves around this process.

There are three distinct types of concept systems:

  • Spontaneous Concept System
  • Scientific Concept System
  • Defined Concept System

I focus on two fields: Knowledge Engagement and Product Engagement. Both fields follow a similar pattern in developing a concept system but differ in the complexity involved in the stage of Continuous Objectification.

For a theorist, the Objectification of Concepts is relatively straightforward — they only need to write a book! However, for a startup founder, the process is more intricate, involving team-building and the creation of a tangible product or service.

On March 2, 2023, I edited the book draft titled Perspectives on Product Engagement (v1.0), using Product Engagement as the context for Continuous Objectification. From this foundation, I developed a model called the Evolving Concept System.

This model breaks down the evolution of a concept system into three components:

  • Mental Platform: How do you think?
  • Behavioral Network: How do you do?
  • Material Container: What do you make?

It means the process of Developing A Concept System is not only about thinking, but also about doing, saying, and making.

In April 2024, I refined this model further and renamed it the Landscape of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise to better reflect its scope and purpose.

It is a 3-dimensional by 3-level hierarchical model. Building on this structure, I expanded it into a toolkit.

Three types of “Engagement” correspond to three distinct types of activities, each with its own Objective and Object. For each type of Engagement, I have selected relevant knowledge frameworks to guide the process.

References:

The Challenge of Thematic Opposition and its Solution

As previously mentioned, in September 2022, I reflected on my four-project journey of “Engaging with Activity Theory” and identified Knowledge Engagement as the primary theme to guide my creative path moving forward.

What did I learn about “Knowledge Engagement” from this reflection?

From the perspective of Project-oriented Activity Theory, a key component of any knowledge-related project is the Objectification of concepts. The diagram below illustrates this process.

The above diagram highlights three forms of concept objectification:

  • Symbolic Objectification: “Verbal” and “Visual”
  • Instrumental Objectification: “Designed” and “Found”
  • Practical Objectification: “Branded” and “Shared”

This reflection revealed various types of objectification outcomes. See the diagram below.

Knowledge Engagement is not only about thinking but also making and doing things about knowledge. In essence, knowledge is like water — you can’t hold it without a container.

What can we learn from the present case study?

Using the House of Project Engagement to reflect on the strategic moves within the journey, I discovered several pairs of opposite themes:

  • Theory vs. Practice
  • Concept vs. Diagram
  • Creation vs. Curation
  • End vs. Means
  • Objective vs. Subjective
  • Individual vs. Collective
  • Whole vs. Pieces

In 2020, I decided to apply Curativity Theory to knowledge building, initiating the Knowledge Curation project, which led to the creation of several book drafts.

The mission behind the Knowledge Curation project was to bridge the gap between Theory and Practice — a critical issue across various fields, including education, organization learning, community building, academic development, enterprise R&D, professional service, etc.

Closing this Theory-Practice Gap could significantly enhance social systems of knowledge production, application, and management at both individual and collective levels.

The journey revealed other thematic oppositions, which led to the development of the ECHO Way, a framework for exploring boundary innovation. Some of the solutions I developed to manage these oppositions include:

  • Separating Diagrams into Meta-diagrams and Domain-specific Diagrams. The former represents only spatial structure, while the latter uses concepts to define specific domain content to form a knowledge framework.
  • Distinguishing Concepts from Themes. Concepts carry defined, objective meanings, whereas themes allow for dynamic, subjective interpretations.
  • Switching between End and Means. Depending on the context, the same knowledge may shift from being an object of focus to an instrument for achieving other objectives.
  • Use the concept of “Project” to connect individual and social life. The Project Engagement approach posits that life is a chain of projects while history is a chain of events.

The result of this process has been remarkable. I’ve created a wide range of knowledge products, including concepts, diagrams, canvases, methods, and toolkits, and have also written articles and edited several book drafts.

The solution I developed to tackle the Challenge of Thematic Opposition is called the ECHO Way. I consider it not only a strategic framework but also a unit of analysis for Creative Life. Further details can be found in The ECHO Way and Mapping Creative Dialogue.

What a fantastic creative journey!

How You Can Support the Strategic Moves Project?

As an independent researcher and creator, my work is driven by curiosity, creativity, and a desire to explore new ideas. Projects like Strategic Moves, as well as others focused on creativity, social cognition, and knowledge engagement, require time, dedication, and resources.

If my work resonates with you and you find value in the ideas I’m exploring, there are several ways you can support it:

  • Visit my Ko-fi page: Your contributions help sustain ongoing research and creative development. Even small donations make a significant impact and enable me to focus on producing high-quality work.

https://ko-fi.com/oliverding

  • Engage with the content: Share my projects with your network or provide feedback. Engagement from a community of like-minded individuals helps spread the word and adds new perspectives to the work.
  • Collaborate: If you’re interested in collaboration, whether through joint projects, research, or workshops, feel free to reach out. Creative synergy can expand the scope and reach of these projects in exciting ways.

Your support, whether financial or in the form of engagement, is invaluable in helping me continue to explore and map creative landscapes, develop new frameworks, and share meaningful insights with the world.

Thank you for being part of this journey!

Strategy
Strategic Cognition
Mapping
Strategic Thinking
Strategy Thinking

--

--

Oliver Ding
CALL4

881 Followers
Editor for

Founder of CALL(Creative Action Learning Lab), information architect, knowledge curator.

Help

Status

About

Careers

Press

Blog

Privacy

Terms

Text to speech

Teams