Taxonomy for Knowledge Inventory

Given that a great deal of literacy is reflected in our conversations, it is not difficult to accept that much of what we say can be traced back to some book or classified publication.  True, knowledge comes from experience, but knowledge is derived from information and information is classified by the Dewey system, WordThink, The Universal Decimal Classification System or any number of proprietary taxonomies.

The difference is that The Bookstore Classification system is attached to a huge multi-billion dollar marketing and production infrastructure.  Think Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com, Borders, etc.  Some would call it an egregious example of corporatism in the public library system.  Others would call it an astonishing opportunity for corporate subsidization of knowledge asset development.  I tend toward the latter.

Knowledge needs to be formatted to behave like a financial instrument. If this can be accomplished then entrepreneurs will innovate in the trade of knowledge assets.  If you want to build an airplane, you need an inventory of parts.  If you went to build a social media as a social infrastructure, then you will need an knowledge asset inventory. If you want to promote innovation, then you want to promote social media.  First and foremost, knowledge assets must look like a buck, walk like a buck and quack like a buck – then they will trade like a buck.

Conversational Currency, The Relationship Economy, and The Ingenesist Project have published on this matter.  But for now, let me leave you with the original article from the Denver Post (below).

Some say that WordThink dumbs it all down, others say it’s easier to browse – see article below for additional analysis.  However, as you read the article suppose you are an entrepreneur not shopping for a book on SEO, but rather, shopping your neighborhood for a person that knows SEO.  Then ask; what’ll it be; Dewey or WordThink?

 

Adams County libraries shelving Dewey Decimal

UA:F [1.6.6_911]