KM had one of its heydays in Alexandria a few years back. The principles are generally the same: capture, preserve, locate, avail explicit knowledge. The near infinite variety of ways that scenario can play out are greatly exacerbated by ever more varieties of information-bearing technologies.

I think an interesting question would be in regards to the CAPTURE vs. CONNECT debate:

Should we capture knowledge (symbols) and facilitate people (interpreter) exchange, or connect people and facilitate knowledge exchange?

Or how do people envisage an organic blend?

These are just some of my thoughts that I collated for this. Clearly not intended to be stated as facts, rather than discussion points and what keeps me awake at nights.

* Knowledge cannot be managed any more than evolution can be managed.

* Conditions can be created, nurtured, and maintained, where knowledge can live, thrive and evolve.

* Knowledge only really exists when it's in active in human interaction.

* Knowledge will modify the environment in which it’s applied (niche construction).

* Knowledge exists in a 'superposition', as a range of possible states, conditions, actions, and only gets it's definite form when it's 'measured', used, in human systems. Therefore codifying knowledge is difficult. Knowledge only manifests itself when applied, in a given situation.

* Information can be codified. Guidelines, anecdotes, instructions.

* Knowledge utilises information.

* In any situation involving several people, the knowledge required to achieve what's needed is always negotiated through dialogue, where people bring their individual knowledge to the process.

* Knowledge transfer happens naturally, efficiently, and adaptively, when artificial constraints and knowledge transfer practises which are based on making trivialised assumptions on the nature of knowledge aren’t imposed.

* The longer information is out of human interaction, the less relevant and adapted to the environment where it one day may be used it may become.

* Information from best practises and knowledge bases may not be adapted to the intended environment. Instead of providing solutions, it may cause perturbations.

* Knowledge doesn’t have to be perfect. Imperfections lead to adaptation and evolution.

* It's far more useful to focus on the social dynamics in human systems than on attempts to codify knowledge.

Dave,

Good initiative. Looking forward to the results. Some remarks.

1) What is the promting question.
2) In the skill question your are assuming IT skill. People can consider themselves as techical but won't relate that automatically to this IT question. Suggestion: replace "technical skills" with IT skill + add a "edu background/ aquired skill since then" question by letting people score themselves in an "alpha - beta - gamma" eduction triad. I'm a chemist but would score myself in between beta and gamma today.
3) I guess the second triad question "resp4learning" needs the word "to" added to it.

That's it for now. Will think again tomorrow morning.