Whence goeth KM? (2)

My earlier blog on this excited a fair amount of comment and track backs. One of those who picked up on it, Peter Jones does not have a track back to this site (hence my link here). The other reason for posting it here, rather than as a comment to the earlier entry, is that he references a paper by Wilson which surveyed the literature and consultancy offerings on the field back in 2002. The title of the paper is The Nonsense of Knowledge Management. A title which leaves no doubt in the mind of the reader as to its conclusion. The paper is very useful but deficient. If you look through its sources, it ignores a lot of main line thinkers and practices. It is based on a limited journal search, reflecting academic prejudice and only focuses on the main line consultancies who were clear advocates of techno-fetishism given their business model. It suffers a logical error which goes along the lines of most of the material I have read or seen on KM is about technology, therefore KM is about technology. The failure of the article to look more widely for material means that WIlson fails to see some the bright shoots that came out of KM and which I tried to emphasise in my earlier blog.