Why is it so controversial to suggest that a known neurotoxin injected directly into the systems of pregnant women, newborns and infant children above federal safety levels MIGHT have caused a neurological disorder in a subset of children with a genetic predisposition against metabolizing mercury efficiently?
One of my earliest posts (Jun 12, 2003) was KM and the Brain (included in its entirety below for ease of reference). Looking at it again nearly 2 1/2 years later I still think the main idea is valid, though I have one update.
Specifically, I think that the neuroscience aspect of KM relates more directly to the behavior of individuals within an organization (the neurons of the organization) and how they connect (or don’t) to each other. In otherwords, Personal Knowledge Management. Because the main function of IT in KM is to provide these connections, I believe it falls under this aspect as well.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ———————
When we talk about brains, we talk about neuroscience as dealing with the technology and psychology/psychiatry as dealing with the processes of the brain. Many KM practitioners recognize, indeed advocate, the distinction of two perspectives on KM: Object and Process. Together they make up a System perspective. You can’t really look at one without the other. You can’t really function without both. As I’m sure you’ve deduced, I’m leading to an analogy:
Neuroscience Object / Technology Perspective
Psych Process Perspective
In other words, KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IS THE NEUROSCIENCE AND PSYCHOLOGY/PSYCHIATRY OF AN ORGANIZATION.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ———————
The Brookings Institution, in conjunction with The Help Group of Los Angeles and with the additional support of the Karmazin Foundation, Autism Speaks, Cure Autism Now, and Michael Fux, will hold a conference to examine policy proposals for expanding the availability and affordability of early intervention for ASD. Drawing on a variety of expert opinions, the conference aims to illustrate that autism and hope are no longer mutually exclusive.
For those unable to attend the conference, a live webcast will be available at www.brookings.edu.
A good background paper is also available to read (.pdf file) in preparation for the conference.
The new book A Parent’s Guide to Asperger Syndrome and High-Functioning Autism: How to Meet the Challenges and Help Your Child Thrive is described as a “road map” to help parents with autistic/Asperger’s kids. I just learned about it this morning from Ginger in Adventures in Autism: New Book for Parents New to ASD Diagnosis.
Though I’ve not yet read it, I do plan to. I’ve written before about the importance of working with our autistic kids’ strengths, and this seems to be a key aspect of this book:
The book’s guiding principle is to focus on a child’s strengths, not weaknesses, and to have parents channel their child’s unusual behaviors and ways of thinking into positive achievements.
‘There are many examples of children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism who grew up to be successful adults. The key was their being able to use their strengths,’ said Dawson. ‘There is a tendency to focus on children’s problems so they don’t get a chance to figure out how to use their strengths. These children have unique ways of learning so it is very important to identify a child’s learning style. This can help them blossom rather than flounder.’
‘Most parents are devastated and the impact on the family is great. Divorce is very common and other siblings sometimes can be neglected. But many parents rally and are able to start on this journey to find their child. They need to know this process is a distance race, not a sprint, and that eventually their child can lead an extremely satisfying and productive life.
‘There is no reason why many people with Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism can’t get married, go to college, get a job and give to society. All are reasonable goals that can be reached, but usually with a lot of work,’ she said.
The reviews on Amazon are all favorable so far, I’ll let you know what I think once I’ve had a chance to read it.
Most parents of autistic children can remember the first time that there children “communicated” with them. Sometimes it is verbal, such as an unexpected – but highly hoped for – “Good night mommy.” Sometimes it is in an action, sometimes it is in writing.
The story Portraits of a silent artist give insight into autism talks about one autistic child’s use of art to communicate with the world and express what is going on in his mind:
Klar-Wolfond, whose 3-year-old son has been diagnosed with the condition, says many experts believe that autistic savants like Lerman are exhibiting inert talents, that their music or math skills are simply weird accidents of neurological wiring, bereft of reason or insights into their surroundings.
‘Some people see this as a quirk of biology’ she says, scanning Lerman’s soulful artwork.
‘They believe that people with autism lack a `theory of mind,’ which means they have a very limited capacity to understand human emotions, they have no capacity to understand thoughts outside their own, can’t read body language and are incapable of symbolic thought.’
Lerman’s work — with its intensely emotive faces — belies this belief, Klar-Wolfond says.
‘It shows that there’s a lot going on, and that we have to rethink the way we interact with people with autism.’
One of the most recurring descriptions of autism is that autistic people lack a “theory of mind,” that they have a limited understanding of the emotions of NT people and that they have no ability to understand thoughts outside their own.
I think, sometimes, that we who are NT have a serious lack of a theory of mind of the autistic. We project our understanding and pre-conceptions of how the mind should function on autistics, and when we don’t see those manifested we assume that there is nothing, or very little, going on in those minds.
I don’t think we could be more wrong.
It never ceases to amaze me what you can find on the Web, in all areas of interest. Obviously in this blog, the information I find and discuss is related to autism. On that note I’d like to introduce you to Asperger’s Conversations: Weekly audio posts by Larry Welkowitz, Ph.D.
I’ve not had a chance to go through it in detail, but one particularly interesting post to me was a discussion Dr. Welkowitz recorded with his class on the subject Counseling Asperger’s and High Functioning Autism: Philosophical Dilemmas:
You be the judge, but I thought that these students (mostly educators, school counselors, and parents) were wary of models that pathologized children with AS/HFA and were moderately skeptical about the role of pharmacology. They were concerned about medication side effects and expressed concerns about superficial understanding of the complexity of these individuals.
I’m looking forward to going through the whole site in more detail.
Commentator Ben Mattlin has been quadriplegic since birth. At the memorial service for a disabled friend who passed away, he came to realize the world needs to expand its definition of what it means to live a successful life, disability or not.
What caught my attention, and inspired the first part of the title of this post, were the last few sentences of the commentary:
Are there no wheelchairs in heaven? I’m not buying it. For me, if there is a heaven, it’s not a place where I’ll be able to walk. It’s a place where it doesn’t matter if you can’t.
If there is indeed a heaven, and our autistic children go there when they die, will they still be autistic?
I used to think that I kind of understood RSS, and could even explain it to people. By the end of the first morning at BlawgThink a couple of weeks ago I realized that I didn’t know nearly as much as I thought I did, and understood even less.
Marshall Kirkpatrick gives us a very nice discussion of what he does when teaching RSS to people. Teaching RSS: A Discussion
Dave Pollard’s list of The 12 Best Business Books of 2005 is worth taking a look at. I’ll definitely be checking at least some of them out.
What really struck me about his review, though, was the summary at the end of the post (emphasis is mine):
In general, it was another disappointing year for books about business. The lack of imagination and courage among book publishers seems to be endemic, and the approach seems almost formulaic — give us a big name cult-of-leadership CEO and let’s bask in his wisdom, or give us a book about some intriguing new management theory, but make sure it sounds like it’s been thoroughly tested out in the real world by dropping the names of familiar Fortune 500 companies who allegedly have deployed this theory — even if they really haven’t. When will publishers, and business book buyers, realize that there are no guarantees, best practices or cookie-cutter implementation methodologies for anything? We should read books to get interesting and useful ideas, and then draw upon our courage and the wisdom of crowds — our employees and customers especially — to decide which ideas to pursue, experiment with them, and then decide how to implement them in the unique context of our own organizations.
Effective efficiency from Frank Patrick’s Focused Performance Weblog.
Jack Vinson and Jim McGee presented a session at BlawgThink about how knowledge management and collaboration affect productivity and process, which I like to look at as effectiveness and efficiency. (Now you know why the phrase appeals to me so much.)
BlawgThink attendee Jeffrey Phillips has also written a bit about process, etc in several posts: Sometimes process doesn’t matter and Actively Unhelpful are two that have caught my eye in recent days.
In the old days of the Industrial Age the relationship between efficiency and effectiveness was, for the most part, a linear one: the more efficient you were, the more effective (productive) you were. Even in the information age there are some activities which are, in essence, information assembly lines in which this relationship holds.
True knowledge work (whatever that is), however, seems to me to have an inverse relationship between efficiency and effectiveness. In other words, the more efficient a process the less room there is for the “waste” that is necessary to support innovation.
I don’t believe this is a straight linear relationship, though, nor is it likely a purely exponential relationship. Somewhere along the line, there is a spike that shows the optimum amount of efficiency to achieve maximum effectiveness in a given knowledge acitivity. (Note that, unlike an assembly line situation where most situations are very similar, true knowledge activities are almost always unique.)
Of course, this all goes back to what exactly we mean by knowledge work. There, I think more than anywhere, the definition of “productivity” and “effectiveness” is truly in the eye of the beholder.