Abstraction And The Cost Of Codification

A key element in understanding the degree and nature of knowledge sharing is to understand the level of abstraction appropriate to the knowledge in question. Abstraction is key to human communication and therefore for knowledge management. By abstraction is meant the process of loss that leads to a higher level of language. This is achieved in two ways:

1. Through the use of technical language and references to books, formula and theorems that is so common among experts. This is the teachable or explicit domain of communication.

2. By reference to shared experiences, values or belief systems often only understood in full by a limited number of participants in a conversation. This is the learning, sense making or tacit domain of communication.

Even the first of this is not context-free, training programmes, different social experiences and cultural differences can all enable or handicap knowledge flow even when the language is explicit and set out in dictionaries. The general rule is that the higher the level of abstraction, the richer the communication but with a diminishing number of participants.

Figure 10.2 looks at the relationship between the level of abstraction and the cost of codification. The cost of codification might be better described as the cost of disembodiment, that is to say the process of removing knowledge from the heads of its creator/owners in such a way as to permit the use of that knowledge without the presence of the creator/owner; a process that is at the heart of much knowledge management practice. Abstraction and codification are key concepts linked to the diffusion of knowledge and an understanding of the relationship between the three can have a profound impact on understanding the economics of knowledge within an organisation and a market (Boisot, 1998).

Figure 10.2: Relationship between level of abstraction and codification

The highest level of abstraction is where individuals have a conversation with themselves. Language, experience, values and beliefs are nearly always identical and as such rapid and effective communication of complex ideas is easily possible. There is some cost in note-taking or other forms of codification, but no one really expects other people to read their notes. At the other extreme where the requirement is to communicate with everyone the cost of codification is infinite as it requires not only a common language and education, but also common experiences and value systems at a level probably even denied to twins.

In between these two points we have a zone of acceptable abstraction within which any form of communication can take place. Understanding is not just a question of comprehension, but also of attitude. In a community of experts they may understand material below the lower level of abstraction (LLAA), but they will not pay attention to it, it is too simplistic given their level of understanding. Sometimes this is a form of entrainment by which they fail to see something because it does not fit the pattern of expected knowledge; often it is simply a question of available time. Those same experts may tolerate knowledge above their personal upper level of acceptable abstraction (ULAA) because they know how to gain access to it, or pride may just prevent their admission of ignorance! Levels of abstraction apply to all types of knowledge from the esoteric knowledge of a theoretical physicist, to the intricacies of a plumbing system. Understanding, or allowing the emergence or evolution of an understanding of those levels is key to any knowledge management activity which focuses on a community or communities; given that most does it is vital.