Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Personal Knowledge Management is Dead. Long Live PKM!?

PKM is Dead. Long Live PKM. Dr. Stefan T. Siegel, notelab

“KM is unfairly perceived as old-fashioned, archaic, conservative, and unattractive”

(Lima et al., 2023).

The Information Age comes with Information Overload (Roetzel, 2019) – and we find ourselves drowning in a sea of information. With powerful tools such as search engines and (generative) artificial intelligence, on the one hand lifebelts and on the other hand knowledge seem to be only a few mouse clicks away. You might ask: Is personal knowledge management dead?

Fact First

Despite its traditional appearance, Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) is far from obsolete. If anything, the complexities, and sheer volume of information today make it more crucial than ever (Nakash & Bouhnik, 2021). Search engines and (generative) artificial intelligence tools aren’t just facilitators of information; they serve as gateways that require us to be more discerning and strategic about the information we consume (Siegel, 2024). These tools call, however, for taking stock of our knowledge management practices. They can enhance and extend the capabilities of traditional knowledge management, rather than replace them.

Questionable Assumptions

The commonly-held notion that PKM is superfluous in the age of search engines and AI rests on several dubious assumptions:

  1. Conflation of Information with Knowledge: While tools like search engines and AI are powerful, their outputs do not equate to deeply integrated and actionable knowledge (Christodoulou, 2014).
  2. Overlooked Importance of Prior Knowledge: Your existing knowledge determines how effectively you can utilize new information. The inability to simply “google” (aka search) an understanding or use ChatGPT effectively without prior knowledge underscores this point (Giebl et al, 2022).
  3. Underestimating the Value of Notemaking and the Process of Building a PKM-System. The belief that PKM is obsolete due to the advancements in technology overlooks the essential value of note-making. Note-making involves actively and conscientiously curating, understanding, and applying information, which contrasts with mere note-taking (Wright & Wallwork, 1962).
Thinking is like googling or asking chatgpt only better Dr. Stefan T. Siegel Postcard

Some Remedies

To counter these challenges, robust PKM practices are essential. These include among others:

  1. Don’t believe the hypes: Engaging in PKM, accumulating knowledge and also memorizing facts is important, even in the age of AI. You have to know stuff to be able to do stuff. Accordingly, I would say: Thinking first, Googling and ChatGPT second (Christodoulou, 2014; Giebl et al., 2022).
  2. Active Curation: Critically ignoring, carefully selecting and validating information to ensure its relevance and accuracy (Siegel, 2024).
  3. Note-making instead of Note-taking: Engaging actively with new information, integrating in into existing knowledge structures to create deeper understanding by using effective learning strategies such as elaboration or making evergreen notes (Wright & Wallwork, 1962).

Especially the third practice resonates with us at Note Lab. As the Note Lab team consists of educational scientists, we deeply believe that this is a very practical and direct application of the learning theory of constructivism. PKM fosters learning and that alone should be a good reason to actively pursue PKM practices.

Concluding Thought: PKM is More Vital Than Ever

Search engines and digital tools can augment, but not replace PKM practices. Far from being obsolete, PKM remains essential for navigating the information-rich digital age (Nakash & Bouhnik, 2021). It enables individuals to manage information overload, derive meaningful insights, and apply them effectively in their personal and professional lives. Following Nakash & Bouhnik, we believe that PKM “is not dead. It has changed its appearance. And it will continue to change” (Nakash & Bouhnik, 2021, 29). At its core, PKM is about making sense of the world in a personal and meaningful way. It involves not just access to information, but the ability to weave it into one’s owns knowledge structures.

References

  • Christodoulou, D. (2014). Seven myths about education. Routledge.
  • Giebl, S., Mena, S., Sandberg, R., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2022). Thinking first versus googling first: Preferences and consequences. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognitionhttps://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000072
  • Lima, J. J. de M., Menezes, L. H. de, Teixeira, M. do R. F., & Redaelli, E. J. (2023). Perspectives and trends in organizational knowledge management. In Harmony of Knowledge: Exploring Interdisciplinary Synergie (1. Aufl.). Seven Editora. https://doi.org/10.56238/sevened2023.006-081
  • Nakash, M., & Bouhnik, D. (2021). “Knowledge management is not dead. It has changed its appearance. And it will continue to change”. Knowledge and Process Management28(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1655
  • Roetzel, P. G. (2019). Information overload in the information age: A review of the literature from business administration, business psychology, and related disciplines with a bibliometric approach and framework development. Business Research12(2), 479–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-018-0069-z
  • Siegel, S. T. (2024). Less is More. Note Lab. https://notelab.hypotheses.org/1016
  • Wright, E., & Wallwork, J. F. (1962). On your own: A guide to study methods. London, England: Longmans.
Dr. Stefan T. Siegel
Dr. Stefan T. Siegel

Nur der Text ist unter der Lizenz Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International nutzbar. Alle anderen Elemente (Abbildungen, importierte Anhänge) sind „Alle Rechte vorbehalten“, sofern nicht anders angegeben.


OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Dr. Stefan T. Siegel (23. April 2024). Personal Knowledge Management is Dead. Long Live PKM!? Note Lab. Abgerufen am 15. Juni 2026 von https://doi.org/10.58079/126ho


Das könnte dich auch interessieren …

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.