For a long time now I have been advocating the role of the ‘knowledge broker’. When I worked at Land & Water Australia (LWA) they had a whole team of what they called ‘knowledge brokers’ but I am still uncomfortable with the role these team members took on as it did not really reflect my understanding of a knowledge broker.
The LWA definition states “Knowledge Brokering – Focuses on connecting people interested in an issue, it helps build relationships and networks for sharing existing research and ideas for stimulating new work. Knowledge brokers provide links between different entities or individuals that otherwise would not have any relationship. It is a dynamic activity and is not simply focused on moving information from a source to a recipient.” It is the last sentence that hits home. As a ‘recovering librarian’ all too often we see the role of the librarian as distributing information to a recipient. It is such a passive role and requires the information seeker to ask for information and then have it delivered. Librarians really need to think outside this role and into a proactive role – and not just running alerting services to their clientele. The information professional needs to get outside the walls of their centre and go out and be part of their organisation and build trusted and strong relationships with their cleints. As we hear so often it is all about building trusted relationships (my old team used to call it ‘not just a one night stand’).
I am very much of the view that all staff in organisations have a brokering role to play. The power in the brokering position becomes obvious when you undertake a Social Network Analysis in an organisation and realise how important relationships are to successful outcomes.
I have developed a model around this and this is the first time I am actually making it public. A select few have seen this but I guess I have been refining it over time (even though it is relatively simple)
The whole idea is that each broker is empowered to create a new broker and that no one actually owns the information or knowledge that is being shared. The idea is to encourage collaboration and sharing.
As my first post this makes me a bit nervous. If you want to hear more about my opinions on the role of librarians as knowledge brokers listen to the podcast interview I did with InMagic about 12 months ago.
Would love some comments on this…..
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 8, 2009 at 17:43
Stuart French
Well done Nerida, welcome to the Blogosphere! (A crazy thing to say because you are already so plugged in, but welcome to the authoring side).
I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts on brokering knowledge. I ran a collaboration demonstration at a conference on Monday and was astounded that 25 people accomplished a fairly complex task in just 15 seconds! Something that would take an individual 15-20 minutes minimum to plan.
Distributing knowledge through an organisation requires setting up a latent ability for knowledge flows and while champions can lead the way, I would aim for the authority and skills to broker being distributed to achieve this.
My question to you is around your comment “no one actually owns the information or knowledge that is being shared”. How do you see brokering being distributed when this is not the case? Where the ownership of the IP does not reside within the organisation or group.
December 8, 2009 at 18:10
hartknowledge
I don’t think any of us actually own the information we share (unless it is highly original which is unlikely unless you are a Nobel prize winner). How much of what we share is highly original??? Mostly we are passing on what we learnt from someone else – which is what I was getting at. Also, how often do we pass on something in its entirety. I think we pass on snippets of information – something Dave Snowden talks about quite often.
December 8, 2009 at 22:00
Stephen Bounds
Hi Nerida,
Nice post and good luck with your blogging!
The whole concept of information “ownership”, when you think about it, is deeply weird. Ownership is a construct of government and convention through patents and copyright but has little basis in reality.
Sure, you can “possess” information, “hoard” information, “steal” information and “share” information — but “own” it? Ownership implies *exclusive* possession — something that is very difficult to prove and enforce when dealing with information.
December 9, 2009 at 02:26
Tweets that mention Why the world needs knowledge brokers…. « Hartknowledge's Blog -- Topsy.com
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by KerrieAnne, Carolyn. Carolyn said: Why the World Needs Knowledge Brokers, post by @neridahart http://is.gd/5g38A […]
July 20, 2010 at 07:29
peterhact
the concept allows us to expand our basis for collaboration. I am slowly encouraging myself to look inwards at my ideals and truths, then outwards to see how I can benefit others with my knowledge. I guess this is the reason for my radical change recently, from a distributor to a reseller. I want to help assist clients to become empowered with technology, and will be working on all levels with them to achieve these potential goals. The topography you describe isn’t new, certainly, but it is a radical take on the knowledge share that we should all do with our peers and equals. Well done on your blog. I am looking forward to reading your insights and experiences. I am convinced that this will enable me to learn about other areas of the ICT industry and impart your knowledge into my client’s perceptions. The greater increase of knowledge ensures that future generations will be the richer for the ideas that we start them thinking about now.