13|How fluid is knowledge transfer ? 🏢

“Knowledge is the walker of an infant business.”

Every activity, for its first time, if planned ahead, be it as liberal as teaching or as conservative as preaching, begins with an investment of knowledge into its project, especially when experience has not yet stepped into the arena. Knowledge is thus, the working capital of a novice.

This article is written to introduce the methods known, but in view of content rather than container. I request the reader, if is an entrepreneur of any personal dream, to share the experiences of hurdles during the early steps of his/her journey towards fulfillment.

Experience is undoubtedly a free guide to our life whereas prior knowledge comes with a cost of transfer, borne by either the benefactor or the beneficiary. Based on the involvement of knowledge carriers, the modes of knowledge transfer between different zones of an organized landscape of activities, are broadly classified into 3 types, as given below.

  1. Frigid – The knowledge has grown into a rigid state, of opinions and of expertise, inside the carrier, so that the transfer of knowledge necessitates the movement of the carrier, from one zone to other. e.g. relocation, hiring
  2. Fluid – The transferrable knowledge courses through a stream of programs, from the carriers to the intended recipients, beginning with initial few expert Inductors followed by intermediate several average Conductors, through multiple tiers of transfer. e.g. internal sharing session, external training curriculum
  3. Fulgid – Independent of carriers, often due to an infant state of expertise or obsolete state of practice, the knowledge glisters openly in a data lake, for its dissemination and assimilation by its observers. e.g. microlearning, massive open online course (MOOC).

As a corollary of fluidity, it is very crucial to note the hindrance in knowledge propagation, even if the knowledge is perfectly fluid, when a recipient, owing to either deliberate opacity or natural incapacity, act as a sealed sink of imparted knowledge, thereby preventing its train of succession. Such individual reservation is detrimental to group accretion of knowledge. e.g. peculation of data.

PLEASE : Comment to let me know how you liked (or disliked) the article. Thank you for reading.

Further Readings :

Micro learnings unsung sibling


3 thoughts on “13|How fluid is knowledge transfer ? 🏢

  1. I have a strange theory. Knowledge is never transferred. Infact we don’t learn anything new from outside. What we call learning is unveiling the tangible idea which is already in us.
    Example: take math. Start from first lesson to a child: numbers. If child can’t recognize numbers, one can’t teach. Only if Ability to recognize already exists, can teacher teach. So, child knows numbers. Then addition, subtraction etc. Then all math. At every step, unless child/now student knows the fact or truth of math, he won’t learn anything. But, if he already knew, there is nothing new to learn. So, process of learning is a process of unveiling. So, knowledge transfer is wrong according me. Knowledge awakening is correct term. What do you think?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Of course, a blind person cannot be “taught” about light but can be “informed”. In that sense, knowledge here merely refers to the capturing of factual information, like a complex relation to express electrical impedance while deeming the imaginary unit only as a mathematical tool. Is imaginary just another tool to comprehend that reality or is it the true reality underlying the imagination of our existence ?

      I just prefer a different term for what you are referring – cognizance, as to the extent of re-cognizing (a second time) what we are taught w.r.t. what is already cognized within (the first time).

      Liked by 1 person

      1. First, an imaginary number of math is not imaginary at all. The term is very wrongly noted like EMF (electro motive force) which is a field and not force.
        Second, if imagination is true Reality, that begs the question of reality of reality. Haha …these subtle concepts are Vicious.
        I like the congnizance term, which I would simply call perception. But there is more I want to speak on this may be elsewhere and some other time.
        (Just think if imagination is reality, why does this imagination can’t imagine an irrational number, however “real” it is and why it can’t imagine 8th color (after vibgyor), but can imagine infinite shapes to an object) etc. What stops or what stirs the imaginative capacity to these constraints?!

        Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.