Content uploaded by Philip William Sisson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Philip William Sisson on Apr 01, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 1
Developing an Understanding of
Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums
Philip W. Sisson* and Julie JCH Ryan
George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia
March 2016
Author Note
Philip W. Sisson, sissonp@aol.com*
Julie JCH Ryan, jjchryan@gwu.edu
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 2
Abstract
In researching Knowledge Management (KM) competencies from a new viewpoint, people and
institutions, and then information, were recognized as knowledge containers. That opened the
door to examining mediums as vehicles for storing and communicating knowledge and
mediumacy as the general competency for doing both. It encompasses mediums that represent
and store and/or communicate knowledge. Media ecology considers media as environments and
addresses a wide range of topics to include media theory. Cultural literacy, media related
literacies, and mediology are discussed in confirming the need for mediumacy and mediums as
new terms. Mediumacy is one of the three competencies identified by the Unified Theory of
KM. In this paper, media theory taxonomy models are examined in the development of
mediumacy. Then media taxonomies and other categorizations are reviewed leading to a
preliminary taxonomy of mediumacy mediums. Inputs from KM competencies sources were
combined to construct summary categories that informally showed that mediumacy generalizes
KM representation, storage, and communication competencies, and with the other two
competencies, is sufficient in terms of addressing KM competencies. An example of applying
media ecology concepts to KM mediums is presented. Suggestions for future research are
identified. This paper provides a look into the breadth of KM mediums and rationale for some
mediums selected for the preliminary taxonomy of mediumacy mediums.
Keywords: knowledge management, media ecology, media theory, mediumacy
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 3
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums
The middle of the twentieth century gave birth to two previously loosely related fields:
media ecology and knowledge management. The term media ecology is often credited to
Postman in 1968 who in turn credits McLuhan (Scolari, 2012, p. 205, citing Lum). From this
paper’s perspective, Altheide and Snow’s (1979) statement “a medium is any social or
technological procedure or device that is used for the selection, transmission, and reception of
information” (p. 11) sets the stage for Knowledge Management (KM) interest with media
ecology. Lambe (2011) attributes the start of KM to KM classics published between 1993 and
1998 (p. 176), but asserts the roots can be traced back to the 1960s and “Fritz Machlup, Kenneth
Arrow, and Everett Rogers” (p. 178) to name three.
How the need for the concept of mediumacy was recognized and the discovery of its
relationship to media ecology is explained in the background section. Next, different media
literacy terms are examined to see why they do not suffice for KM competency terms and new
terms are needed. Third, existing classifications and taxonomies are brought forth as inputs for a
taxonomy of mediumacy mediums. Fourth, initial categories of the taxonomy are identified and
the model is matured looking at the Chicago School of Media Theory student Media Taxonomy
Models ("Media Taxonomy Models," 2003-4) and related conceptual classifications. How
mediumacy and the other two competencies postulated by the Unified Theory of KM were
checked for completeness is mentioned. Finally, areas for future research are discussed and key
points are restated.
STIPULATED DEFINITIONS
The terms in Table 1 set the stage for discussion of mass media ecology and their
potential use in clarifying mediumacy as a KM competency.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 4
Table 1
Definitions of key Terms
Term
Definition
Media
Media is "a medium of cultivation, conveyance, or expression; especially medium"
(Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Academic Edition), 2001, media). For McLuhan,
(and Altheide and Snow), "media include not only radio and TV, but also written
words, clothing, money, and so on" (Chen, 2003, p. 451). “A medium is any
social or technological procedure or device that is used for the selection,
transmission, and reception of information” (Altheide & Snow, 1979, p. 11).
Mass
media
Mass media is "the main means of mass communication (television, radio, and
newspapers) regarded collectively" (Oxford Dictionary of English, 2010-2015,
media) also “magazines ... and Internet sites that purvey news, information,
misinformation, and all shades of opinion” (A Dictionary of Public Health, 2007,
mass media). Mass media also includes “large-scale organizations which use ...
these technologies” (Scott & Marshall, 2009, mass media, sociology of).
Medium
A medium, from a KM context, is “a means or instrumentality for storing or
communicating information” ("media vs. medium," 2014) - representations of
knowledge. The authors suggest mediums as multiple medium(s) for mediumacy;
as opposed to media with its often mass media connotation.
Media
ecology
Media ecology is the notion (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media ecology) and
"study of media as environments, the idea that technology and techniques, modes
of information and codes of communication play a leading role in human affairs”
(Strate, 1999; "What is Media Ecology?," 2014, President's Message).
Mediacy
Mediacy (media literacy) (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media literacy (mediacy)),
(also media education) “refers to the knowledge, skills, and competencies required
in order to use and interpret media” (Buckingham, 2003, p. 36; Hobbs, 2005, p.
866; Kamerer, 2013, p. 5; Sisson & Ryan, 2015a, p. 5).
Cognitacy
“Cognitacy is thinking about” - the use of knowledge and reasoning about it
(Sisson & Ryan, 2015a, pp. 3, 5; 2016, p. 4).
Kennacy
“Kennacy is about thoughts management, building muscle memory in people,
proposition management in artificial intelligence, and people and artifacts in
organizations.” It “is the accumulation and organization of knowledge.” (Sisson &
Ryan, 2015a, pp. 3, 5; 2016, p. 4)
Mediumacy
Mediumacy is skill with the representation in and the storage and/or
communication of knowledge through mediums (knowledge containers) (Sisson &
Ryan, 2015a, p. 3 & 5).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 5
BACKGROUND
In 1968, Postman introduced the term media ecology - “the study of media as
environments” (1970) (Strate, 2002, p. 1), “what we can see, say and do” (Scolari, 2012, p. 205).
The Media Ecology Association (MEA) restates this and also highlights Strate and Nystrom.
Like some peoples’ preoccupation with Information Technology in the KM field, Strate, as cited
by the MEA, has a technology bent; although, MEA mentions human affairs, other media topics,
and McLuhan Studies (including cultural studies). Nystrom (per MEA) brings forward the idea
of media ecology as a metadiscipline. Postman’s views are amplified with human interaction
aspects ("What is Media Ecology?," 2014). Scolari (2012) presents the idea of a historical
technology emphasis when he says, “As every communication scholar knows, the media ecology
tradition and thinkers such as McLuhan, Postman, and Innis have been found guilty of
technological determinism” (p. 219). More generally from a different perspective, media
environment is "a metaphorical concept framing the media as environing and invisibly shaping
human life” (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media environment); while, "media ecology is ‘loosely,
a synonym for media culture’” (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media ecology).
“Knowledge Management (KM) simply stated is the accumulation and organization of
knowledge – by example, the process of obtaining phone numbers and writing them in a book.”
Structurally it can be viewed as three competencies: kennacy, cognitacy, and mediumacy (Sisson
& Ryan, 2016).
1
Mediumacy is competency with storage and communication of representations
of knowledge - "containers of knowledge” (McElroy, 2002, pp. 2, 12, 13 & 19). The media of
media ecology and mediumacy of KM is where the two fields overlap.
1
These names were coined for KM as “names were coined for literacy (1880) (OED, 2011-2015),
numeracy (1959) (Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage, 2008), and oracy (1965) (A dictionary of education,
2009; OED, 2011-2015; Wilkinson, 1970)” (Sisson & Ryan, 2016, p. 1).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 6
MOTIVATION
KM has an abundance of definitions and KM models, and while all of them reveal
elements of KM, the KM community has long recognized that a general model was needed. As
Holsapple and Joshi (2004) stated, that in a decade of effort, “KM researchers have not provided
a well-integrated framework to the community that would help unify this discipline” (p. 593).
Beesley and Cooper (2008) and Lambe (2011) restated the need. Still others continue to decry
the lack of a solution as Dalkir (2013) reports Davenport and Prusak did as far back as 1998.
The Unified Theory of Knowledge Management KM competencies, cognitacy, kennacy and
mediumacy, were suggested as an answer. Cognitacy was found in Bloom’s Educational
Taxonomies and the need for kennacy in educational objectives and guidelines. (Sisson & Ryan,
2016) Mediumacy was another new construct needed for completeness and also needed
amplification. Exploratory research beginning with media and media literacies concepts in the
search for KM competencies led to selecting mediums instead of the word media to use in KM
contexts. Terms found during developing a system model of KM led to other sources used in
identifying KM mediums (Sisson & Ryan, 2016). This paper explores such mediums and the
breadth they encompass.
MEDIA LITERACIES
The literacy landscape is complex. “Media literacy” “overlaps with many other types of
literacy … including information literacy, digital literacy, scientific literacy, visual literacy, and
cultural literacy" (Scheibe, 2007, p. 526). In this section, some of these terms plus mediology
and computer, information and communication technology are discussed and why they do not
suffice to stand for mediumacy is stated. Information management is included because of its
close relationship to information literacy and the technical literacies. Another reason this last
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 7
topic is included is that the graphic from the Association for Information and Image Management
(AIIM) (2014) provides good examples of storage media.
Media Literacy
Media is "a medium of cultivation, conveyance, or expression; especially medium"
(Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Academic Edition), 2001, media). For McLuhan, and Altheide
and Snow, "media include not only radio and TV, but also written words, clothing, money, and
so on" (Chen, 2003, p. 451) – words like food, heat, bodies, geometry, memory, Atari cartridges,
windchimes, breathmints, carrier pigeons, ingredients, etc. ("Media Taxonomy Models," 2003-4,
student models). However, in the common vernacular ("media vs. medium," 2014), and in much
of the literature, media stands for mass media. Mass media is "the main means of mass
communication (television, radio, and newspapers) regarded collectively" (Newman, 2014, para.
1; Oxford Dictionary of English, 2010-2015, media)
2
; it is also magazines “and Internet sites that
purvey news, information, misinformation, and all shades of opinion” (A Dictionary of Public
Health, 2007, mass media). Mass media also includes “large-scale organizations which use these
technologies (Scott & Marshall, 2009, mass media, sociology of). Mass media literacy is much
of what media literacy is about.
Media Literacy (mediacy) (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media literacy), in the United
States, is called media education “in the United Kingdom” (Kamerer, 2013, p. 5). At its core, it
“refers to the knowledge, skills, and competencies that are required in order to use and interpret
media”
3
(Buckingham, 2003, p. 36; Hobbs, 2005, p. 866; Kamerer, 2013, p. 5; Sisson & Ryan,
2
As of October 12, 2015, “(broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet)” (Oxford Dictionary of English,
2010-2015, media).
3
“Media literacy certainly includes the ability to use and interpret media; but it also involves a much
broader analytical understanding” (Buckingham, 2003, p. 38).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 8
2015a, p. 5). Media literacy includes representing, storing, and communicating, but it also
includes interpretation, analysis and use - cognitacy.
Mediacy is not useful as a term for a KM competency because it is too narrow (mass
media impressions and definitions) ("media vs. medium," 2014). It is also too narrow in that it
“is [also] seen to consist of a series of communication competencies” (NAMLE, 2014, para. 1).
It is too broad as it overlaps with the other media related literacies, as already mentioned.
(Marcum, 2004, p. 229; Martin, 2013, pp. 115 - 117; Tyner, 2007)
Mediology
A variation of Debray’s word mediology was considered because the roots of the word
imply the study of media. However, Debray and Rauth (1995) take “the term mediology to
designate the study not of different forms of media per se but of the mediations through which an
idea or visual representation [une imagerie] becomes a material force.” – “of making people
believe” (pp. 530 - 531). They discuss mediaspheres as ways and limits of visual interpretations
(p. 532). Mediologacy as a mediology competence would address skill in analysis of
“institutions of transmission,” how technology is embedded in culture (Irvine, 2006-2014), and
while not over- focusing on mass media (Melinda, 2009), it is not suitable for mediumacy.
Cultural Literacy
The term cultural literacy has many viewpoints beginning with what everyone should
know which includes canonical works, significant historical events, social schema, iconic images
(Chandler & Munday, 2011, cultural literacy), assumptions, beliefs, “principles, norms,
unwritten rules,” procedures, (Dave, 1998, p. 144), “values, attitudes, beliefs, and
predispositions” (Xu, 2010, p. 168), and “code of behavior” (Kinnucan-Welsch, 2010, p. 240). It
includes "the knowledge and skills needed to succeed within a culture” (Xu, 2010, p. 168).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 9
Although, the definitions address cultural literacy competency, overall, in these meanings,
cultural literacy mostly misses the needed implication of skill in the ongoings of both people and
institutions with regards to them as knowledge containers. With regards to KM and mediumacy,
beliefs, attitudes, etc., and basic understandings of these are important. Besides structure,
cultural interpretations (meanings and symbology) from cultural content are important in
knowledge transfer and relevance setting - story telling as an example. KM in people and
institutional mediums requires competency in cultural literacy. Culture is important in
determining meaning.
However, people mediumacy is sufficiently different from institutional
4
mediumacy to
not be able to state one key competency of KM is cultural literacy (implying both people and
institutions). Organizational Learning (OL) makes that evident. OL is said to consist of
individual, group, and organizational learning (Argyris & Schön, 1978; Crossan, Lane, & White,
1999, p. 523). Organization memory consists of retrievable (Kim, 1993, p. 43) artifacts and
information (“‘brains and paper’” (Walsh & Ungson, 1991, p. 63) crediting (Pondy & Mitroff,
1979, p. 19). People and artifacts have different attributes leading to the conclusion that cultural
literacy has at least two types of mediums: people and groups of people (including institutions).
The idea of cultural literacy leads to people and institutional mediums, but cultural literacy is not
a hierarchical collection point for either.
Information Literacy
Information literacy holds a place in the education system similar to media education
because information is facts (data) (Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Academic Edition), 2001,
information) and news in addition to representations of knowledge and a measure of
4
Argyris and Schön (1978) say an institution is, among other things, “a cognitive artifact made up of
individual images and public maps” (p. 12).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 10
communication capacity (Puddlefoot, 2003, p. 455). From a communication perspective, Ruben
says “information is a coherent collection of data, messages, or cues organized in a particular
way that has meaning or use for a particular human system’ (Ruben, 1988, p. 19)” (as cited in
Schement, 2002, p. 422).
Information literacy addresses recognizing a need, identifying, accessing, evaluating,
organizing and using information (Harmon & Symons, 2002, p. 526; Huling, 2002, p. 870;
Marcum, 2004, p. 228) as well as preparing communications with foci on understanding content
and media use. TFPL (1999) clarifies with creating and adds sharing (TFPL, p. 11). Like
mediacy, information literacy is too narrow and too broad.
Computer, Information and Communication Technology
Computer Technology, Information Technology (IT), and “Information and
Communication Technology (ICT)” (Buckingham, 2003, p. 95) often address similar concepts.
From a media perspective, ICT is “an umbrella term for all of the various media employed in
communicating information: for example, in an educational context ICT may include computers,
the internet, television broadcasts, and even printed or handwritten notes” (Chandler & Munday,
2011, information and communication technology (ICT)).
From a computing, communications industry worker’s viewpoint (as well as some
educational viewpoints), ICT is IT. IT is currently the principle implementation vehicle for
information management - often thought of in a computer sense (OED, 2011-2015, information
technology). It has been broadened to include electronic means (Law, 2009, information
technology). Computer literacy has a breadth of meanings from simple use (Tidline, 2002, pp.
161-162), choosing and using the correct application appropriately (Kamerer, 2013, p. 13),
comprehending “physical devices and software”, purchase and management (Hughes, 2004, pp.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 11
77-78), through actual programming (Sterne, 2003, p. 165). Computer literacy involves
cognitacy, kennacy, kinestheticacy
5
with also technologies, devices, and software and
management approaches that can all be considered mediums in at least one aspect.
Aspects of these literacies do provide indications of mediums that can be considered.
Headrick (2003) provides a list of historical storing and transmitting technologies: language,
writing, postal systems, printing, optical telegraphy, electrical telegraphy, telephony, radio
telegraphy, broadcasting, recording media, motion pictures, and data processing. There are
seven media layers in the “OSI reference model”: “application layer, presentation layer, session
layer, transport layer, network layer, data link layer, and physical layer” (Ince, 2013, OSI
Reference Model). Bretz (1971) identifies seven classes of media in telecommunications
(transport) and recording (storage) media, including picturephone, telewriting, teletype, and
punched paper tape to list non-mass media ones (p. 66). ICT includes many media, but using
ICT literacy as the term for the concept would omit mediums from the other literacies.
Information Management
Information management literacy can be viewed as a subset of information literacy. It is
"the functions of controlling the acquisition, analysis, retention, retrieval, and distribution of
information" ("ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2010-12-15 Systems and software engineering --
Vocabulary," 2010, p. 174). While included in information literacy, it under-emphasizes the
critical analysis of the content and interpreting of the meaning, message, etc. Information
5
Kinestheticacy is another term developed “In Pursuit of Kennacy.” It comes from Bloom’s Psychomotor
Domain and the Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence in Gardner’s multiple intelligences. Kinestheticacy is about
competence in bodily-kinesthetic areas (think of athletes). “In Pursuit of Kennacy” has more on Bloom’s
taxonomies and competencies in this vein (Sisson & Ryan, 2015b, p. 5 and 8) and “Improving Educational
Guidelines” (Sisson & Ryan, 2015a, p. 5) for other competency terms that should be included in policy statements.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 12
management also includes informatics/information science and sometimes,
6
but not usually,
information theory.
7
Information management is included here in the sequence of literacies
because it provides additional insight into IT storage media.
AIIM (2014) asserts that “focus of IM is the ability of organizations to capture, manage,
preserve, store and deliver ... information” (para. 3). The visualization on the same web page
presents threescore of individual areas: such as rich media, OCR, XML, RAID, film,
syndication, fax, etc. which are mediums for capturing, storing or sharing information. For the
most part, all of the storage media addressed are different representations of information mostly
stored today in computer memory or output media.
Literacies Summary
All of these “literacies” address some combination of representation, storage, and/or
communication of knowledge. Some of them address more. Some focus on one over the other.
Some already have other meanings. None are suitable for the meaning the authors are trying to
address.
MEDIA ECOLOGY AND THEORY
Media ecology is the notion (Chandler & Munday, 2011. media ecology) and "study of
media as environments, the idea that technology and techniques, modes of information and codes
of communication play a leading role in human affairs” (Strate, 1999; "What is Media
Ecology?," 2014, President's Message). Sometimes it is clearly focused on communications
6
Informatics is information science (Oxford Dictionary of English, 2010-2015, informatics) ; it is "the
scientific study of information, its storage, and its processing" (Park & Allaby, 2013, informatics); and it is "the
study of information and the ways to handle it, especially by means of information technology, i.e., computers and
other electronic devices for rapid transfer, processing, and analysis of large amounts of data" (A Dictionary of
Epidemiology, 2014, informatics; Kling & Hara, 2004, p. 225). Note that The Oxford Dictionary of Biochemistry
and Molecular Biology (2006) limits the term to scientific information (informatics).
7
“Broadly, information theory refers to both Shannon's approach and other probabilistic methods of
analyzing communication systems" (Kline, 2004, p. 377) from a capacity measurement perspective.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 13
(Nystrom, 1973, p. 3; "What is Media Ecology?," 2014) and mass media (Strate again) and
sometimes stands for media culture (Chandler & Munday, 2011, media ecology). Media culture
defines (Altheide & Snow, 1979, p. 11) as well as represents the culture (Chandler & Munday,
2011, media logic).
Historically focused on the mass media, media theory can lead further afield topics such
as communications theory (probably more in its human communication sense than the
mathematical study one). Chandler and Munday (2011) cover, almost itemize, media theory’s
broad interests and contexts regarding mediated communications with a mass media flavor
(media theory). However, the Media Taxonomy Models to be discussed next depict a broad
range of unconstrained (more than mass media) media considered, but in separate models. The
results of the Chicago School of Media Theory’s Media Taxonomy Models were particularly
useful in elaborating the initial taxonomy of mediumacy mediums.
TAXONOMIES OF MEDIA
In his Taxonomy of Communication Media Bretz (1971) splits media in two main
categories, telecommunication and recording. They are then broken into seven groups based on
similar attributes: “sound, picture, line graphics, print, motion” (Bretz, 1971, p. 66; Neuendorf,
Brentar, & Porco, 1990, p. 101). Advances in communications and recording since 1971 mean
that more current devices and media would need to be added to Bretz’s model. While categories
may need to be changed or increased, Bretz’s taxonomy presents a good view of
telecommunications and recording media from its perspective.
The Chicago School of Media Theory models present a wider range of structures,
contexts discussed, and sample media. Forms include hierarchical trees, spreadsheets, pictorial
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 14
and others. Contexts listed in the summary include senses; metaphysics; ranges, neighborhoods
and localities and intermedia (W. J. T. Mitchell, de Almeida, & Reynolds, 2004).
Figure 1 shows one approach using a Venn diagram based on three senses (“Eye-image-
opsis-spectacle;” “ear-music- melos” and “hand- text-lexis-diction”). Looking at mediums in
terms of the senses they impact works well to show common and differing mass media aspects.
In the top-level model we see common mass media and other sense-related media: writing,
painting, architecture (eye); theater, television, music video, cinema (visual-audio); magazine
(tactile visual); cell phone, video game, the internet, advertisement (intersection); speech, radio,
music (ear); telephone (audio tactile) and braille money (hand). Kasia’s figure 2 (not shown)
expands architecture to “stone, brick, wood,” and nails and other media (Houlihan, 2004).
Kasia’s model does not address the other two
senses (taste and smell) as does Bivar (2003) or
Nevin (2004) with his cuisine and hygiene product
categories. Viet (2004) includes the nose in her
figure 1 (like some others, including touch), but
omits smell from her figure 2 showing the different
perspectives of the authors.
Figure 1. Kasia’s Taxonomy of Media
Note: Extract reproduced from Media Taxonomy Models (Houlihan, 2004)
Of more interest in terms of representations, storage, and communication are: 1) Knox
(2004) relates reality with the sender/receiver in terms of perception and presents four trees of
external representation: multimedia, words, music, and image with technology and the body
being the first branches. 2) Viet (2004) prepared four figures. The first related sender and
receiver such as mouth speech/spoken and word ear. The second is unconnected media
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 15
groups such as photography impacted by photographers and developers. His third and fourth
figures compare and contrast attributes. 3) Brendcheidt’s (2003) taxonomy of the arts in terms of
linguistic/non-linguistic, spatial/indirectly spatial, and moving in space and time/static offers a
different way at looking at media. The Brendcheidt model shows an interesting classification
approach where the different media are grouped differently across the categories (see Figure 2).
4) Clinton (2003) adds logic, mathematics, geometry, and physics as part of
time/space/form/causality in his model.
Linguistic / non-linguistic
Spatial – Indirectly Spatial
Moving in time or space / static
Linguistic (speech, film, etc.)
Spatial (theatre, dance, etc.)
Static (writing, painting, etc.)
Figure 2. Brendcheidt’s media taxonomy model.
Note: Major portions of graphic are reproduced in row 2 with labels in row 1 from graphic
(Brendcheidt, 2003).
Clearly, there are a large number of ways to represent media relationships and contexts
from which to consider mediums. Many of these aspects will contribute to the elaboration of the
mediumacy taxonomy.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 16
TAXONOMY OF MEDIUMACY MEDIUMS (KNOWLEDGE CONTAINERS)
A medium, from a KM context, is “a means or instrumentality for storing or
communicating information” ("media vs. medium," 2014) - representations of knowledge
("containers of knowledge”
8
) (McElroy, 2002, pp. 2, 12, 13 & 19), “an agency or means of doing
something" (Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage, 2008, medium). The authors suggest
mediums as multiple medium(s) for mediumacy as opposed to media with its often mass media
connotation. Mediums can be a wide range of categories and elements and mediumacy mediums
are the subset that can represent and store and/or communicate knowledge.
Initial Development of the Taxonomy
Besides Bretz’s Taxonomy of Communication Media and the Media Taxonomy Models,
there are other interesting categorizations that can be used as starting points for developing a
taxonomy of mediumacy mediums. From the section on computers, information and
communication technology, Headrick’s historical technologies provided initial elements for
storage and communication mediums. Wijnhoven (2011) identifies “seven storage media ...
individuals, culture, transformation, structure, ecology, external environment, and information
systems” (p. 1242)
9
. Allocating individuals to culture based on the cultural literacy discussion
and deferring ecology and external environment leaves communication, transformation,
structure, culture, storage, information systems and representation as initial mediumacy top-level
mediums. Applying Headrick’s postal system technology label requires generalizing
8
McElroy lists opinion, process, strategy, report, e-mail, documentary and speech as examples of
”instantiations of knowledge.” (McElroy, 2002, table 1.1, p. 12)
9
“Walsh and Ungson postulate six potential storage bins, above and beyond information systems:”
(Schwandt & Marquardt, 2002, kindle location 2317-2331) “individuals, culture, transformations, structures,
ecology, and external archives” (Walsh & Ungson, 1991, p. 81) (former employees and competitors) (Schwandt &
Marquardt, 2002, k. 2317-2331).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 17
information systems to systems. The label structure was change to framework during the
elaboration step that follows.
Elaboration of the Model
Following the selection of seven starting top-level categories in the previous paragraph,
the authors examined Media Taxonomy Models and other relevant descriptions to identify
typical elements for the seven categories. They also identified additional categories based on
elements that were not previously accommodated or needed to be moved or replicated. See
Figure 3, the end result of the observations made during this phase.
Containers
People
Groups
Institutions
System
Education
Institutions
Wire
Delivery
Manage
Store
Preserve
Capture
Postal
COPs
Email
KM Solutions
TPL – TCP/IP
Print
Analog
Digital
Artistic
Memory
Mass Media
Artifacts
CDs / DVDs
Transformation Culture
Mass Media
Storage
Communication
Cave Drawings
Microwave
Air (Light)
Perceived
Sight
Hearing
Touch
Smell
Taste
Framework
Mathematics
Quadrivium
Interpretation
Sender
Artifacts & Entities
Telegraphy
Sciences
Classifications
Information
Senses
Processes
Institutionalization
Integration
Interpretation
Intuition
Organizational
AI
Humanities
Creative Arts
Operational Arts
Space / Time
Roles
Nervous System
Representation
Numbers
Symbols / Icons
Words
Images
Diagrams
Equations
Graphs
Mental Model
Language
Task Abstraction
Frameworks
Visual Images
Concepts
Plans & Reviews
Figure 3. A collection of medium categories with typical elements (preliminary taxonomy)
A discussion of the evolution from observations in storage, communications, frameworks
and processes, perception/receivers/senders, representations, and space/time areas follows.
Storage media. Five of seven of Wijnhoven’s suggested storage media labels are used
directly, but the authors’ use of them as terms vary from Wijnhoven’s definitions. Considering
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 18
the elements being added to the structure category, the authors chose the label framework over
structure. The label “frameworks” has also been included in representations as well. Including
more framework/structural media elements and checking for consistency would help clarify the
appropriateness of this choice. Ecology (workplace layout, or architecture as listed by
Wijnhoven) in the authors’ view can be interpreted as environment and each of the listed media
are and imply an environment.
10
All the categories shown in the white ovals in the grayed area,
exist as represented in the perceived space/time (Knox, 2004; Sabu, 2004; Weg, 2004). People
and organizations (as institutions) from Wijnhoven’s external media category are included as
culture elements. “Client and market characteristics” (Wijnhoven, 2011, p. 1241) provided as
examples of his external category does not need to be added. The five identified transformation
media are from Information Management according to AIIM ("AIIM," 2014).
Communications. Most of Headrick’s categories are included specifically or by
reference. Broadcasting and motion pictures is inferred from mass media, data processing in
transformations, and systems.
From the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model (Ince, 2013, open systems
interconnection) for network communication, applications and presentation (not necessarily
strictly the presentation layer) are represented in the systems category. The session layer is not
specifically represented. The network, “data link and the physical layers” are included in the
communications category. TCP/IP as an example of a transport protocol layer (TPL) is included
as a sample transport media. Telegraphy, (Headrick, 2003, Information and Communication
Technology) shown in the communications category, while much reduced is not yet in Sandifer’s
10
“The notion of media as environments is associated with McLuhan and Neil Postman who claim that we
unconsciously adapt to different media much as animals adapt to different habitats” (Chandler & Munday, 2011,
media ecology) .
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 19
(2004) taxonomy’s “Dead Media” category. However, Sandifer’s idea of carrier pigeons,
although being a dead medium, led to splitting artifacts (Schadlick, 2004) into artifacts and
entities. Choi’s (2003) media taxonomy constructed hierarchical relationships partitioning air
into light, heat, radio waves and sound, represented by air (light) in the communications
category.
Frameworks / processes. Archer’s (1978) “world of learning” and “world of action” are
reflected in the sciences, humanities, creative arts and operational arts (p. 6) implying gaming,
dance, and painting, etc. that show up in the Media Taxonomy Models. The quadrivium
11
is
representative of an education framework; sciences include physics (identified by (Clinton,
2003)); classifications include taxonomies, ontologies, etc. The term roles was added to
frameworks based on Schwandt’s and Marquardt’s (2002) clarification of Walsh and Ungson’s
listing of “potential storage bins” with structures as roles (Schwandt & Marquardt, 2002, k.
2317-2331). Because they can be viewed as structuring knowledge, an arrow from framework to
processes indicates processes are part of frameworks. McElroy considers processes as an
”instantiation of knowledge” (McElroy, 2002, table 1.1, p. 12).
Perception / receivers / senders. Perception, labeled Perceived in Figure 3, captures a
number of Media Taxonomy Model sensing concepts as well as a receiver concept. In this
model, processes can also perceive as indicated by the dashed arrow between the Perceived and
Processes ovals. Artificial Intelligence and Crossan’s (1999) organizational learning model
“with four processes - intuiting, interpreting, integrating, and institutionalizing - linking the
individual, group, and organizational levels" (p. 522) - extend perception into inanimate entities.
11
The quadrivium is “a group of studies in the Middle Ages consisting of arithmetic, music, geometry, and
astronomy, constituting the higher division of the seven liberal arts, and forming the course for the three years of
study between the B.A. and M.A. degrees” (MWU, 2013-5, quadrivium).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 20
People, groups and institutions are shown as cultural media. Merging the idea of Crossan’s
interpreting, with culture providing meaning, resulted in the culture category provisionally being
double labeled as interpretation (Culture and Interpretation ovals in Figure 3).
Senders are related to communication media in this preliminary model. Mass media and
artifacts each show up twice. One meaning is the communication meaning like TV, radio or a
painting. The other is as a representation of culture.
Representation. "Peirce distinguished three kinds of signs: icons,” … “natural signs (e.g.
clouds signify rain); and conventional signs (e.g. red for danger, and at least the majority of
words)” (Lyon, 2005, semoitics). One of four of "Roland Barthes's Elements of Semiology” is
language/speech (Encyclopedia of Semiotics, 1998, elements of semiology). These, with the
addition of numbers, make up the upper grouping in the representation category.
From another viewpoint, four concepts make up Te'eni’s (2011) framework for
supporting KM communication: “context, levels of abstraction, adaptation, and organizational
memory” (p. 562). The idea of levels of abstraction added mental models and task abstraction to
the representation category and resulted in visually grouping of other elements. Organizational
memory is reflected in institutions (culture/interpretation) and in integration
(organizational/processes) categories. Te'eni’s ideas also led to concepts being added to the
representation category. Context (the model is mediumacy) addresses the context of the
diagram. Context can also be any one of the mediums shown, a combination of them or some
other context. For Te’eni, adaptation is matching the medium to the communication situation
and is not specifically represented in the taxonomy.
The idea of visual literacy as "the ability to read, understand, interpret, critically evaluate,
use, and produce messages in visual forms" (Chandler & Munday, 2011, visual literacy)
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 21
provided sudden, unexpected relevance to DeBray’s mediaspheres. “The videosphere, the era of
the visual,” beginning with color television provides a different kind of mental model. Together
with the logosphere (“from the invention of writing to that of printing”) and the graphosphere
(“from the time of the printing press to that of color television)” (Debray & Rauth, 1995, p. 532)
they roughly fit three of the four visual partitions of the representation category as so far
elaborated.
One change was made during the review of KM competencies in the next section. Plans
and reviews were added to representations as management mediums. Messages as a leadership
medium were considered being added to the communication category; however, many
communication models have a sender, a message and a receiver. A communication without a
message is nonsensical.
The representation category was shown on the border because, like perception, all the
other categories require both representation of the knowledge and perception of the message in
practice.
Space / Time. Besides Schadlick’s (2004) new concepts
12
which mentioned immediacy,
immediacy is one of the six spokes of Holsapple and Joshi’s (2004) “web of knowledge
attributes” (p. 598) as is perishability. Both point to time (or currency) as being a factor to
consider. Brendcheidt’s (2003) three figures (one being Figure 2 in this paper) address space.
The first separates mediums which are spatial (dance, sculpture) and those which are indirectly
spatial. The other does the same moving in time or space (speech, film) and static (writing,
painting). Brendcheidt’s four differentiators are attributes of the media she portrays. In our
current taxonomy, Space/Time is shown touching the other parts of the model, but not a part of
12
“In which/through which, immediacy, extension, and amputation” (Schadlick, 2004, para. 1).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 22
it. Knowledge is represented, stored, and communicated in space/time, but space/time does not
represent, store, or communicate knowledge. From this model’s perspective, space/time can be
considered an attribute.
Informal Validation
Perhaps not surprisingly after looking at the Media Taxonomy Models, mediumacy
mediums for representation, storage, and communication of knowledge cover quite a breath of
areas. An informal validation of mediumacy was conducted to see if it encompassed the
competencies not implied by cognitacy and kennacy. Nine competencies (leadership,
management, “human and organizational behavior” (Roknuzzaman & Umemoto, 2010, p. 275),
organizational learning, information management, systems engineering, technology, knowledge
asset management, and personal/self) were identified by collecting and summarizing concepts
from 13 sources (Abell & Oxbrow, 1999; Calabrese, 2000, p. 116; Daniel, 2002; Excerpt
Graphics and Tracings for KM Competency Document, 2011; KM Functions Survey Results
_20124002, 2012; Knowledge Management Framework for Behavioral Competencies and
Attributes, 2011; Mohammad & Mukherjee, 2013; Remez, 2001; Roknuzzaman & Umemoto,
2010; TFPL, 1999; Ternes, 2011, pp. 37-38, 45; Todd & Southon, 2001, p. 320; Wieneke &
Phlypo-Price, 2010). In general these “KM competencies” are other disciplines. Management is
used by most disciplines and is not a unique KM competency; however, as previously
mentioned, identification of these competencies resulted in adding plans and reviews to the
representation category of the taxonomy as management mediums. Similarly, system
engineering would be a meta-KM competency that could be used in developing KM solutions as
finance, HR and other systems are developed. Technology represents a super set of, by example,
storage mediums; knowledge asset management is a domain specific common discipline whose
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 23
knowledge stores may be KM specific while the storage artifacts are not. More work would be
required to clarify completely, but mediumacy completes a KM competency picture that was
missing when looking only at cognitacy and kennacy, and to a large degree, traditional KM
competency listings as well.
AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Altheide and Snow’s (1979) media ecology “selection, transmission, and reception” (p.
11) media includes both the social and technological. KM mediums represent, store and
communicate knowledge as "containers of knowledge” (McElroy, 2002, pp. 2, 12, 13 & 19).
The Media Taxonomy Models bring them closer together.
The intellectual activity engaged in jumping from Gleick’s (2011) discussion of
information to IT and culture as KM mediums might be called a probe by McLuhanists
beginning as it did in the middle and branching out (McLuhan & Zhang, 2013) to all the
examples of KM mediums in Figure 3. Looking at cyber security starting with institutions,
considering Internet use as a privilege, not a right (Sisson & Ryan, 2014)
13
was an attempt to
apply ideas such as affordance, sense ratio, media richness, and modality from media ecology to
mediumacy. Can media ecology terms and metaphors such as environment, intermedia
relationship, “evolution, interface[, particularly] hybridization,” suggested by Scolari (2012, p.
218), also offer ways to gain insight into KM mediums/mediumacy? The authors believe that
media theorists and media ecology methods might help reveal new KM insights when applied to
KM with mediumacy context.
13
It also suggests that providers should be legally mandated to take more aggressive administrative actions
to remove users, domains, etc. that engage in “misrepresenting the sender (forgery), misrepresenting the content
(fraud), bulk acquisition of domain names provided for criminal activity (conspiracy), or continuing to provide a
virtual private network which is known to support such activities (accessory),” etc. and use crowd sourcing to help
identify such “inappropriate internet activity” related to common law based crimes (Sisson & Ryan, 2014).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 24
Similarly, thinking about knowledge, versus information, and media as mechanisms for
representing, storing, and communication knowledge might offer some new perspectives for
media ecology. Do all the concepts of the ten knows (including overloaded know-why (Sisson &
Ryan, 2015c, p. 2) and know-like play appropriately in media studies? In the new internet world,
do new thoughts about the innovation process (innate lesson cycle (Lewis, 2013, pp. 53-110;
2015)) help any with media studies formulation?
The definition of mediumacy may need to be reviewed and perhaps modified or clarified.
Selection could be considered as suggested by Altheide & Snow’s (1979) definition of “a
medium is any social or technological procedure or device that is used for the selection,
transmission, and reception of information” (p. 11); however, reception, from the Unified Theory
of KM perspective, is part of an entity’s environmental stimulus and selection is a part of
cognitacy. Is selection as a part of cognitacy sufficient? Does the transformations category in
the taxonomy’s model imply selection as a part of the process?
The authors are researching many ideas that surfaced during the discovery of the Unified
Theory of KM. The interrelation of media ecology and theory and KM is not near the top of that
list. The authors welcome others’ investigations into the suggested relationship between media
thought and KM mediumacy.
CONCLUSIONS
Mediumacy offers a way of thinking about how knowledge is represented, stored, and
communicated. It encapsulates most, if not all, of KM competencies not included in cognitacy
and kennacy.
It would be useful if discussions about media clarified the context that is being used.
Differentiating between mass media and unconstrained media types would be a good start. By
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 25
example, the (domain) media taxonomy models are more easily understood when labeled with
context as Brendcheidt (2003) does by providing the label “Arts” to set the stage for her media
taxonomy model. Models can also provide a lot of clarification by including typical lower level
media. By example, in the taxonomy of mediumacy mediums, mediums implied by words like
clothing, food and cuisine (although implied by artifacts) do not show up as they do in the Nevin
(2004), Whitehead (2004), and Neziroski (2003) models. This provides an example of different
foci.
Regardless, for KM, the big value of mediumacy is a non- interdisciplinary viewpoint.
Many disciplines have interdisciplinary aspects. Cognitive science is interdisciplinary as is
media ecology. Nystrom (1973) states that “media ecology is the study of complex
communication systems as environments” (p. 1 (i)) and, in 1973, was an emerging
metadiscipline (p. 3). Metadiscipline is a term that may apply to KM as well. KM relies on and
integrates to apply ideas and implementing concepts of many implementing, supporting and
specialty disciplines;
14
however, together cognitacy, kennacy, and mediumacy appear to offer a
comprehensive competency perspective of KM (Sisson & Ryan, 2016, p. 6). Mediumacy helps
visualize such interdisciplinary, yet disciplinary biased concepts of KM as contexts in a situation.
Such contextual views remain useful for intellectual consideration and in implementation;
however, they may no longer need to vie for consideration as the general model.
Mediumacy reflects “cognitive understanding and practical skill with a medium” (Sisson
& Ryan, 2016, p. 4). Mediums, as expressed by (W. J. T. Mitchell, 2004), are everywhere, just
14
By example, 1. Implementing: Information Management, Human Resources, Information Management,
Engineering, Library and Information Science, Finance, Economics, Sales/Business Development/Marketing. 2.
Supporting: Psychology, Sociology, Philosophy, Neuroscience, Anthropology, Biology, Practice Management. And
3. Specialty: Communications, Organizational Behavior / Organizational Development, Change Management,
Decision Science, Risk Management, Service Management, Cognitive Science
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 26
as are the basic KM functions of knowledge use, accumulation, reasoning, and organization.
This paper provides a look into the breadth of KM mediums and rationale for some mediums
selected for the preliminary taxonomy of mediumacy mediums.
Research on the Unified Theory of KM and other observations falling out of investigation
of KM generalizations from a systems perspective is ongoing. The authors invite others to
suggest classifications, taxonomies, ontologies, or models of KM mediums.
REFERENCES
Abell, A., & Oxbrow, N. (1999). Skills for the Knowledge Economy: the reality of the market-
place. Business Information Review, 16(3), 115-121. doi:10.1177/0266382994237225.
Altheide, D. L., & Snow, R. P. (1979). Media logic. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Archer, B. (1978). Time for a revolution in art and design education - RCA Papers No. 6.
Retrieved from
http://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/385/1/Time_for_a_Revolution_in_Art_and_Design_Educa
tion_1978.pdf.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM). (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.aiim.org/what-is-information-management.
Beesley, L. G. A., & Cooper, C. (2008). Defining knowledge management (KM) activities:
towards consensus. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(3), 48-62.
doi:10.1108/13673270810875859.
Bivar, V. (2003). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomybivar.htm.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 27
Brendcheidt, D. (2003). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomybrenscheidt.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomybrenscheidt.htm, October 5, 2015.
Bretz, R. (1971). A taxonomy of communication media. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational
Technology Publications.
Buckingham, D. (2003). Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Calabrese, F. A. (2000). A suggested framework of key elements defining effective enterprise
knowledge management programs. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
(9970022)
Chandler, D., & Munday, R. (2011). A dictionary of media and communication Oxford
paperback reference (pp. 472). doi:10.1093/acref/9780199568758.001.0001.
Chen, S.-L. S. (2003). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. In S. Jones (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of New Media (pp. 451-453). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,
Inc. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412950657.n237.
Choi, D. (2003). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomychoi.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomychoi.htm, October 5, 2015 (no longer
displays).
Clinton, D. (2003). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyclinton.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyclinton.htm, October 5, 2015 (no longer
displays).
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 28
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework:
From Intuition to Institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3). Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/259140.
Dalkir, K. (2013). Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice (Kindle Version). Retrieved
from Amazon.com.
Daniel, E. H. (2002). Knowledge Management, Careers in. In J. R. Schement (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Communication and Information (Vol. 2, pp. 506-508). New York:
Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3402900146&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=aa8e71f1c1637e63f9bdf5969793c6a7.
Dave, K. P. (1998). An investigation of knowledge management characteristics: Synthesis,
Delphi study, analysis. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (304430909) .
Debray, R., & Rauth, E. (1995). The Three Ages of Looking. Critical Inquiry, 21(3), 529-555.
doi:10.2307/1343936.
A dictionary of education. (2009). S. Wallace (Ed.) Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/acref/9780199212064.001.0001.
A Dictionary of Epidemiology. (2014). M. Porta (Ed.),
doi:10.1093/acref/9780195314496.001.0001.
A Dictionary of Public Health. (2007). J. M. Last (Ed.),
doi:10.1093/acref/9780195160901.001.0001.
Encyclopedia of Semiotics. (1998). P. Bouissac (Ed.),
doi:10.1093/acref/9780195120905.001.0001.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 29
Excerpt Graphics and Tracings for KM Competency Document. (2011). Retrieved from
http://kmefcompetenciescop.iwiki.kent.edu/file/view/Excerpt%20Graphics%20and%20T
racings%20for%20KM%20Competency%20Document%20%282%29.pptx.
Gleick, J. (2011). The information : a history, a theory, a flood (1st Vintage Books ed.). New
York, NY: Vintage Books.
Harmon, C., & Symons, A. K. (2002). Librarians. In J. R. Schement (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
Communication and Information (Vol. 2, pp. 525-527). New York, NY: Macmillan
Reference USA. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3402900151&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=f2ee922ae7df70ddd61f151fa463a2e3.
Headrick, D. (2003). Information and Communication Technology. In J. Mokyr (Ed.), The
Oxford encyclopedia of economic history (e-reference ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press. Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordreference.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780195105070.
001.0001/acref-9780195105070-e-0374.
Hobbs, R. (2005). The State of Media Literacy Education. Journal of Communication, 55(4),
865-871. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb03027.x.
Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2004). A formal knowledge management ontology: Conduct,
activities, resources, and influences. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 55(7), 593-612. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/docview/231432531/abstract?accountid=11
243.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 30
Houlihan, K. (2004). Interlocked Circles of the Senses: A New Taxonomy of Media. Retrieved
from http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyhoulihan2.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyhoulihan1.htm, October 5, 2015.
Hughes, S. K. (2004). Computer literacy. In A. Distefano, K. E. Rudestam, & a. R. J. Silverman
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of distributed learning (pp. 77-79). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412950596.n27.
Huling, N. (2002). Reference Services and Information Access. In J. R. Schement (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Communication and Information (Vol. 3, pp. 867-874). New York, NY:
Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3402900240&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=a15fa16ac4343b4bbc3aea3c5fbae5c4.
Ince, D., A. (2013). A Dictionary of the Internet. doi:10.1093/acref/9780191744150.001.0001.
Irvine, M. (2006-2014). Introduction to Mediology: An Overview of Theory and Method.
Retrieved from http://faculty.georgetown.edu/irvinem/theory/WhyMediology.html.
ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2010-12-15 Systems and software engineering -- Vocabulary. (2010). (pp.
410): IEEE. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5733835.
Kamerer, D. (2013). Media literacy. Communication Research Trends, 32(1), 4-25. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/docview/1349156012.
Kim, D. H. (1993). The Link Between Individual and Organizational Learning. Sloan
Management Review, 35(1), 37. Retrieved from
http://proxygw.wrlc.org/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/224961788.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 31
Kinnucan-Welsch, K. (2010). Critical Literacy. In T. C. Hunt, J. C. Carper, T. J. I. Lasley, & C.
D. Raisch (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Educational Reform and Dissent (pp. 240-242).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412957403.n106.
Kline, R. (2004). Information Theory. In W. S. Bainbridge (Ed.), Berkshire Encyclopedia of
Human-Computer Interaction (Vol. 1, pp. 377-380). Great Barrington, MA: Berkshire
Publishing. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3455100101&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=53f9ecf5e1ca1e90364d385c42edffb7.
Kling, R., & Hara, N. (2004). InformaticsEncyclopedia of Distributed Learning (pp. 225-228).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412950596.n80.
KM Functions Survey Results _20124002. (2012). Retrieved from
http://kmeffunctionscop.iwiki.kent.edu/file/view/KMEF%20Function%20Survey%20Res
ults_20120402.doc/316850678/KMEF%20Function%20Survey%20Results_20120402.d
oc.
Knowledge Management Framework for Behavioral Competencies and Attributes. (2011).
Retrieved from
http://kmefcompetenciescop.iwiki.kent.edu/file/view/Behavioral+Competencies+and+Att
ributes.docx/268514278/Behavioral%20Competencies%20and%20Attributes.docx.
Knox, D. (2004). Non-Evolutionary Media Tree Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyknox1.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyknox1.htm, October 5, 2015.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 32
Lambe, P. (2011). The unacknowledged parentage of knowledge management. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 15(2), 175-197.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673271111119646
Law, J. (2009). A Dictionary of Business and Management. Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordreference.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780199234899.
001.0001/acref-9780199234899 doi:10.1093/acref/9780199234899.001.0001.
Lewis, J. (2013). The Explanation Age (3 ed.). United States.
Lewis, J. (2015). Innate Lesson Cycle™. Retrieved from http://www.explanationage.com/innate-
lesson-cycle.html.
Lyon, A. (2005). Semiotics. In T. Honderich (Ed.), The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (2nd
ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acref/9780199264797.013.2317.
Marcum, J. (2004). Information Literacy. In A. Distefano, K. Rudestam, & R. Silverman (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Distributed Learning (pp. 228-232). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412950596.n81.
Martin, J. (2013). Refreshing information literacy: Learning from recent British information
literacy models. Communications in Information Literacy, 7(2), 114-127. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/docview/1496849473/citation.
McElroy, M. W. (2002). Excerpt from - The new knowledge management : complexity, learning,
and sustainable innovation, xxxi, 246 p. Retrieved from
http://www.macroinnovation.com/images/McElroy_nkm.pdf.
McLuhan, E., & Zhang, P. (2013). Media Ecology: Illuminations. Canadian Journal of
Communication, 38(4), 459-475.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 33
Media Taxonomy Models. (2003-4). Retrieved from
http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/projects-2/media-taxonomy-models/.
media vs. medium. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.gingersoftware.com/english-
online/spelling-book/confusing-words/media-medium.
Melinda. (2009). Regis Debray – What is Mediology? Media and performance theory - Part of
the Media Studies Research Master at Utrecht University.Retrieved from
http://mandptheory.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/what-is-mediology/.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Academic Edition). (2001). Encyclopædia Britannica online.
Retrieved from http://academic.eb.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/bps/dictionary?query=Search
Mitchell, W. J. T. (2004). Medium Theory: Preface to the 2003 Critical Inquiry Symposium.
Critical Inquiry, 30(2), 324-335. doi:10.1086/421127.
Mitchell, W. J. T., de Almeida, E., & Reynolds, R. (2004). Towards a Taxonomy of Media.
Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomynavigation.htm, reditected
to https://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/wjtmitchell/ (different information).
Mohammad, N., & Mukherjee, B. (2013). Knowledge management competencies required
among library and information science professionals. Library Review, 62(6/7), 375-387.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LR-02-2013-0025.
NAMLE. (2014). Media Literacy Defined. Retrieved from http://namle.net/publications/media-
literacy-definitions/.
Neuendorf, K. A., Brentar, J. E., & Porco, J. (1990). Media Technology Hardware and Sensory
Channels: Cognitive Structures in Multidimensional Space. Communication Research
Reports, 7(2), 100-106. Retrieved from
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 34
http://proxygw.wrlc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=ufh&AN=18443575&site=ehost-live.
Nevin, J. (2004). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomynevin.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomynevin.htm, October 5, 2015.
Newman, L. (2014). mass media. Retrieved from
http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/mass-media/.
Neziroski, L. (2003). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyneziroski.htm, at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyneziroski.htm.
Nystrom, C. L. (1973). Toward a Science of Media Ecology: The formulation of integrated
conceptual paradigms for the study of human communication systems. (Ph.D. Ph.D.),
New York University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/pqdtft/docview/287996744/citation/A4290
DE1483C48A3PQ/1 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. (287996744)
Oxford Dictionary of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. (2006). A. R. Cammack, P. P.
Campbell, V. A. Smith, & J. Stirling (Eds.). Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordreference.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780198529170.
001.0001/acref-9780198529170-e-9952 doi:10.1093/acref/9780198529170.013.9952.
Oxford Dictionary of English. (2010-2015). A. Stevenson (Ed.). Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordreference.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780199571123.
001.0001/acref-9780199571123 doi:10.1093/acref/9780199571123.001.0001.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 35
Oxford English Dictionary. (2011-2015). Oxford University Press. Retrieved from
http://www.oed.com.proxygw.wrlc.org.
Park, C., & Allaby, M. (2013). A Dictionary of Environment and Conservation. Retrieved from
doi:10.1093/acref/9780199641666.001.0001.
Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage (2 ed.). (2008). R. Allen (Ed.),
doi:10.1093/acref/9780199232581.001.0001.
Pondy, L. R., & Mitroff, I. I. (1979). Beyond open system models of organization. Research in
organizational behavior, 1(1), 3-39. Retrieved from
http://web.archive.org/web/20121021184723/http:/glenn.osu.edu/faculty/brown/home/Or
g%20Theory/Readings/Beyond%20Open%20System%20Models%20of%20Organization
1.pdf.
Puddlefoot, J. C. (2003). Information. In W. Van Huyssteen (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science and
religion. New York, N.Y.: Macmillan Reference US, Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3404200282&v=2.1
&u=wash74137&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w.
Remez, S. G. (2001). Who Will Lead the Knowledge Revolution? An Examination of the
Differing Roles of the CIO and CKO. In R. C. BarquiÌ, A. Bennet, & S. G. Remez (Eds.),
Knowledge management: The catalyst for electronic government (pp. 285-300). Vienna,
VA: ManagementConcepts.
Roknuzzaman, M., & Umemoto, K. (2010). KM Education at LIS Schools: An Analysis of KM
Master's Programs. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 51(4),
267-280. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/docview/759961844/abstract.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 36
Sabu, D. (2004). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomysabu.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomysabu.htm, October 5, 2015.
Sandifer, P. (2004). Dead Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomysandifer.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomysandifer.htm, October 5, 2015.
Schadlick, J. (2004). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyschadlick.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyschadlick.htm, October 5, 2015.
Scheibe, C. (2007). Media Literacy, Approaches to. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
Children, Adolescents, and the Media (pp. 526-529). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Inc. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412952606.
Schement, J. R. (2002). Information. In J. R. Schement (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Communication
and Information (Vol. 2, pp. 421-426). New York: Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved
from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3402900129&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=afd11a89c5545fefdc9d14f93550c1ee.
Schwandt, D., & Marquardt, M. J. (2002). Organizational learning: From World-Class Theories
To Global Best Practices. Retrieved from Amazon.com.
Scolari, C. A. (2012). Media Ecology: Exploring the Metaphor to Expand the Theory.
Communication Theory, 22(2), 204-225. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01404.x.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 37
Scott, J., & Marshall, G. (2009). A Dictionary of Sociology. Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordreference.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780199533008.
001.0001/acref-9780199533008 doi:10.1093/acref/9780199533008.001.0001.
Sisson, P. W., & Ryan, J., J.C.H. (2014). Applying Mediumacy in Cyber Security.
Sisson, P. W., & Ryan, J., J.C.H. (2015a). Improving Educational Guidelines.
Sisson, P. W., & Ryan, J., J.C.H. (2015b). In Pursuit of Kennacy.
Sisson, P. W., & Ryan, J., J.C.H. (2015c). What Do We Know? – Building a Knowledge Concept
Map. Proceedings from ECKM 2015: 16th European Conference on Knowledge
Management. Udine, Italy.
Sisson, P. W., & Ryan, J., J.C.H. (2016, September 15, 2015). Towards a Unified Theory of
Knowledge Management (KM). Paper presented at the 49th Hawaii International
Conference on Systems Sciences.
Skills for knowledge management: building a knowledge economy (TFPL) (1 870889 84 3).
(1999). Retrieved from http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv11857.
Sterne, J. (2003). Education and computers. In S. Jones (Ed.), Encyclopedia of new media: An
essential reference to communication and technology (pp. 165-167). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412950657.n85.
Strate, L. (1999). President's Message – Understanding MEA. In Media Res, 1(1). Retrieved
from http://www.media-
ecology.org/publications/In_Medias_Res/imrv1n1.html#President%C2%92s.
Strate, L. (2002). Media ecology as a scholarly activity. Paper presented at the Third Annual
Convention of the Media Ecology Association, Marymount Manhattan College.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 38
Te’eni, D. (2011). Knowledge for Communicating Knowledge. In D. G. Schwartz & D. Te'eni
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 560-569).
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX1786800066&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=7f48b2ab701bb8765129a439d03cbeb3.
Ternes, C. D. (2011). Confirming the Stankosky Knowledge Management Framework. ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses. (3479076).
Tidline, T. J. (2002). Computer Literacy. In J. R. Schement (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
Communication and Information (Vol. 1, pp. 161-165). New York: Macmillan Reference
USA. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3402900057&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=13e267785c594f19adce4dd2629e00e9.
Todd, R. J., & Southon, G. (2001). Educating for a knowledge management future: perceptions
of library and information professionals. The Australian Library Journal, 50(4), 313-326.
doi:10.1080/00049670.2001.10755965.
Tyner, K. (2007). Media Literacy, Aims and Purposes of. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
children, adolescents, and the media (pp. 524-526). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Inc. Retrieved from
http://knowledge.sagepub.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/view/childmedia/n271.xml?rskey=wIj9
oq&row=7. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412952606.n271.
Viet, L. (2004). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyveit1.htm at
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 39
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyveit1.htm, October 5, 2015 (figures no
longer display).
Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational Memory. The Academy of Management
Review, 16(1), 57-91. doi:10.2307/258607
Webster's third new international dictionary, unabridged (MWU). (2013-5). Retrieved from
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/.
Weg, A. (2004). Media Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomyweg.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomyweg.htm, October 5, 2015.
What is Media Ecology? (2014). Retrieved from http://www.media-
ecology.org/media_ecology/index.html.
Whitehead, D. (2004). Non-Evolutionary Media Tree Taxonomy. Retrieved from
http://hum.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/taxonomy/taxonomywhitehead.htm at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/taxonomy/taxonomywhitehead.htm, October 5, 2015.
Wieneke, S., & Phlypo-Price, K. (2010). The Knowledge Management and Application Domain
- An encompassing Knowledge Management framework. US: Enterprise Learning and
Knowledge Awareness.
Wijnhoven, F. (2011). Operational Knowledge Management. In D. G. Schwartz & D. Te'eni
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 1237-1249).
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX1786800131&v=2.1&u=wash74137&i
t=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=d029bb1b7814052468ac5f5ee50b7cb4.
Wilkinson, A. (1970). The concept of oracy. English journal, 59(1), 71-77. doi:10.2307/811736.
Developing an Understanding of Knowledge Management (KM) Mediums 40
Xu, S. (2010). Cultural Literacies. In C. Kridel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies (pp.
168-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.4135/9781412958806.n99.
