The Landscape of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise
In the past 10 days, I reflected on the Knowledge Engagement project and developed a new framework to expand its original scope.
On May 6, 2022, I made a model about “Building Knowledge Enterprise Activity” which brought the concept of “Knowledge Center” to my creative journey.
CALL: How to Grow A Knowledge Enterprise
https://lnkd.in/gvzxgrAd
From May 2022 to March 2024, the concept of “Knowledge Center” became the primary focus of my journey.
I also use the theme “Knowledge Engagement” to refer to the same creative journey.
The Knowledge Engagement Framework (v4)
https://lnkd.in/gZ-2EsZU
A New Possible Book: Knowledge Engagement (Knowledge Center and Creative Life Theory)
https://lnkd.in/g4B4meBp
Last week I detached my mental focus from “Knowledge Center” and attached it to “Knowledge Enterprise”.
This is the end of the Knowledge Center project and the beginning of a new creative journey.
The new journey starts with the above semiotic system diagram.
Contents
1. A Model of Building A Knowledge Enterprise
2. Engaging with A Knowledge Center
3. A New Perspective
4. Beyond Knowledge Center
5. The Knowledge Enterprise Toolkit
6. Mapping A Knowledge Enterprise
7. The Middle Layer
8. Toward General Genidentity Theory
1. A Model of Building A Knowledge Enterprise
In May 2022, I wrote an article titled How to Grow A Knowledge Enterprise.
Originally, I developed the model below for the Activity Analysis project. Later, I realized that it can be a general model for building knowledge enterprise activity.
Project-oriented Activity Theory inspires the model. Each phase refers to a focus. The following diagram inspires the three-phase development, one of a series of diagrams in the book.
I used the above diagram to explain the concept of “culture” from the perspective of Project-oriented Activity Theory. It zooms out to a large view that connects the Individual mind (Idea) and Collective theme (Zeitgeist) through Collective Projects (Concept).
The above diagram also mentions three knowledge frameworks I am working on:
Each knowledge framework could be adapted to support one phase of the Building Knowledge Enterprise (BKE) Activity.
2. Engaging with A Knowledge Center
From May 2022 to April 2023, I focused on the concept of “Knowledge Center”.
In 2023, I also adopted ideas from Lui’s theoretical sociology and used his creative life as a case of “Knowledge Center”. The outcome is Creative Life Theory (v2.0) and the Knowledge Engagement framework.
Ping-keung Lui is a theoretical sociological theorist. He was the Principal Lecturer (retired) at the Department of Applied Social Science at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Lui aims to build a brand new theoretical sociology as a candidate for the paradigm of sociology. In 2007, Lui published a Chinese book titled Gaze, Action, and the Social World in which he presented his account of theoretical sociology.
He continuously developed his account of theoretical sociology with various activities such as writing books and papers, teaching courses, and curating academic discussions.
In 2016, Lui registered the Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology (TSTS) in Hong Kong. From 2012 to 2016, Lui and several members hosted online discussions about theoretical sociology and related theoretical themes via email conversations and WeChat groups. The discussions have been edited and published in several volumes.
From 2007 to 2022, it is a 15-year journey of developing a theoretical approach to sociology.
From April 2022 to April 2023, I read Lui’s papers and books. We had email conversations and Wechat discussions. While learning ideas about sociological theories from Lui’s approach, I also considered his 15-year journey of developing a brand-new theoretical sociology as a case for the Slow Cognition project.
From Jan 2023 to April 2023, I read Gaze, Actions, and the Social World at various places. I also wrote 15 notes which total 228 pages.
Gaze, Actions and the Social World was published in 2007. I wrote notes chapter by chapter. This idea turned my normal notes into a passion project.
The outcome is amazing! I reflected on the following three projects while replaying Lui’s journey of developing his theory.
- The Knowledge Engagement Project
- The Creative Life Framework
- The Theme of “Value Circle”
You can find more details in Value Circle #2: Engaging with Lui’s Theoretical Sociology.
3. A New Perspective
I also developed several new frameworks which form the Creative Life Theory (v2.0). One of these frameworks is called the Creative Course Framework. See the diagram below.
The Creative Course Framework was inspired by Lui’s Subjectivist Structuralism which is part of his theoretical sociology.
You can find more details in Knowledge Engagement: The Creative Course Framework.
The above diagram is the basic model of the Creative Course framework which was inspired by Lui’s Subjectivist Structuralism.
According to Lui, “I made a distinction between action and its course; that is, action is not a reality but its course is. My justification is based on a fundamental ontology.” (p.251, 2016)
Lui considers the following four realities for his theoretical sociology:
- the Weberian course of action
- the Giddensian course of action
- Social Territory
- Symbolic Universe
The above diagram only uses “Course of Action”.
I also connected it with Value Circle, Anticipatory Activity System, and other models. The result is an expanded version. See the diagram below.
The above large diagram is the outcome of a Diagram Blending process. You can see five sub-diagrams that represent five frameworks.
- Center: The Creative Course Framework
- Left: The Value Circle Framework
- Right: The Universal Reference Framework
- Up: The Anticipatory Activity System Framework
- Down: The Knowledge Circle Framework
You can find more details in Knowledge Engagement: The Expanded Creative Course Framework.
4. Beyond Knowledge Center
In April 2024, I developed a new model for Building A Knowledge Enterprise.
The new model was based on the “Developing A Concept System” model which is inspired by a model of the Ecological Practice Approach. See the diagram below.
Developing A Concept System is not only about thinking, but also about doing, saying, and making.
- Mental Platform: How do you think?
- Behavioral Network: How do you do?
- Material Container: What do you make?
Based on the above simple model, I developed a model of Building A Knowledge Enterprise. See the diagram below.
It is a 3 dimensions x 3 hierarchical levels model.
3 Dimensions
- Mental Platform
- Material Container
- Behavioral Network
Mental Platform
- Knowledge Elements
- Knowledge Frameworks
- Knowledge System
Material Container
- Themes
- Representations (such as Diagrams)
- Things
Behavioral Network
- Circles
- Projects
- Social Network
The Middle Loop
- Knowledge Frameworks
- Representations (Such as Diagrams)
- Projects
Based on the above model, I expanded it into a toolkit.
5. The Knowledge Enterprise Toolkit
I added three types of “Engagement” to the framework:
- Knowledge Engagement > Mental Platform
- Value Engagement > Behavioral Network
- Material Engagement > Material Container
Three types of “Engagement” refer to three types of Activities. Each type of Activity has its Objective and Object.
For each type of Engagement, I select relevant knowledge frameworks.
- Knowledge Engagement: The Knowledge Discovery Canvas
- Value Engagement: The Developmental Project Model
- Material Engagement: The Product Langue Framework
6. Mapping A Knowledge Enterprise
The Landscape of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise can be used as a map. The diagram below is an example.
Let’s apply the above model to map the landscape of TALE (Thematic Analysis Learning Engagement).
TALE was launched as a knowledge center to host the Thematic Engagement project in Jan 2023.
From Jan 2023 to Dec 2023, TALE developed a series of knowledge frameworks, methods, tools, and relevant ideas. The diagram below shows the landscape of TALE.
Though TALE was originally launched to host the Thematic Engagement framework, it discovered some new ideas and developed several new knowledge frameworks.
- The Theme(Concept) Model
- The Strategic Thematic Exploration Framework
- The Early Discovery Model
TALE also developed a set of creative themes and some unique methods of creative representation.
- Thematic Cards
- Thematic Network Diagram
- Thematic Transformation Method
- Thematic Transformation Map
- Thematic Scrapboard
- Mapping Thematic Conversation
TALE also explored the section of Behavioral Network. It uses the Thematic Engagement model to define the value of different developmental stages. It launched the Thematic Conversation Project.
Though my primary focus is Knowledge Enterprise, the above model can be applied to general enterprise.
There are many types of enterprises, and they share the following three dimensions:
- Mental dimension
- Material dimension
- Behavioral dimension
Different types of enterprises have different primary dimensions. We can use the above model to conduct case studies and develop sub-frameworks for various domains.
7. The Middle Layer
I also noticed there is a simple version of the Evolving Knowledge Enterprise. See the diagram below.
This is the middle layer of the model. It only focuses on the following entities:
- Knowledge Framework
- Project
- Representation
This is the key to building a successful knowledge enterprise.
8. Toward General Genidentity Theory
On May 29, 2022, I reflected on the development of several knowledge centers and developed the Platform Genidentity framework.
The Platform Genidentity Framework is an application of the Ecological Practice Approach. Why do I consider the concept of “Genidentity” as a member of the approach?
The diagram below is the basic model of the approach. However, The Ecological Practice Approach considers the world as a nested container system. Things move between different containers.
For a particular thing, its trajectory is called “Lifeflow”. There is a theoretical issue with Lifeflow:
How can a thing keep its uniqueness over time?
In order to answer this question, I adopted Kurt Lewin’s concept Genidentity as a solution.
What’s Genidentity? Let’s quote a short piece from Wikipedia:
- As introduced by Kurt Lewin, genidentity is an existential relationship underlying the genesis of an object from one moment to the next.
- What we usually consider to be an object really consists of multiple entities, which are the phases of the object at various times. Two objects are not identical because they have the same properties in common, but because one has developed from the other.
- Lewin introduced the concept in his 1922 Habilitationsschrift Der Begriff der Genese in Physik, Biologie und Entwicklungsgeschichte. It is today perhaps the only surviving evidence of Lewin’s influence on the philosophy of science. However, this concept never became an object of widespread discussion and debate in its own terms. Rather, it was extracted from its context by philosophers such as Rudolf Carnap, Hans Hermes, Hans Reichenbach, Adolph Grünbaum, and Bas van Fraassen who incorporated this concept into their own theories such as the topology of the universe or the axiomatization of mechanics.
- Lewin’s idea was to compare and contrast the concept of genidentity in various branches of science, thereby laying bare the characteristic structure of each and making their classification possible in the first place.
Though Genidentity was originally developed for discussing the difference between various branches of science and their dynamic development, it is about a “topology of identity” and temporal dynamics from my perspective.
I developed an operational definition for the concept of Genidentity: A thing’s Genidentity is defined by Essential Differences with Situated Dynamics. In this way, we turn a philosophical concept into a practical concept for empirical research.
In 2019, I worked on the early version of Platform Ecology and applied the concept of Genidentity to study digital platform design and development.
I used the diagram below to represent a rough idea of the “Platform Genidentity” framework.
What’s Platform Genidentity? I use the concept of Platform Genidentity to describe a process of keeping the uniqueness of a platform within a long-term duration. For example, Google.com (a Search Engine), Wikipedia.org, YouTube.com, these three websites keep their original core design without major changes.
In order to understand the complexity of Platform Genidentity, I developed the following two new concepts:
- Platform Core: a basic unit of a platform. For example, a Tweet, a YouTube video page, a Q&A page on Quora, etc.
- Platform-ba: a platform-based sociocultural field. For example, YouTube-ba is a YouTube-based sociocultural space. You can find more details here.
As mentioned above, we have an operational definition of the concept of Genidentity: A thing’s Genidentity is defined by Essential Differences with Situated Dynamics.
For Platform Ecology, we need to discover the sources of Essential Differences and Situated Dynamics. I think the sources are Platform Core and Platform-ba. However, they don’t work as a one-to-one mapping relationship. See the above diagram.
If we want to expand the Platform Genidentity Framework to General Genidentity Theory, we can use the model of Evolving Knowledge Enterprise to replace “Platform Core” and “Platform-ba”.
This is a great milestone in the development of the Ecological Practice Approach.
