Rowley (2007) The Wisdom Hierarchy.pdf
The hierarchy referred to variously as the “Knowledge Hierarchy” is one of the fundamental models in the information and knowledge literatures.
Typically information is defined in terms of data, knowledge in terms of information, and wisdom in terms of knowledge, but there is less consensus in the description of the processes that transform elements lower in the hierarchy into those above them.
The hierarchy is used to contextualize data, information, knowledge, and sometimes wisdom, with respect to one another and to identify and describe the processes involved in the transformation of an entity at a lower level in the hierarchy (e.g. data) to an entity at a higher level in the hierarchy (e.g. information).
The implicit assumptio is that data can be used to create information; information to create knowledge, and knowledge to create wisdom.
Over the years there has been little direct discussion of the DIKW hierarchy itself, its meaning and contribution, and limited discussion of the nature of wisdom, and of the organizational processes that contribute to its cultivation.
The object of this paper then is to revisit the DIKW hierarchy, with focus on the popular articulations of the hierarchy to which students and professionals are exposed.
Here we refer to the DIKW hierarchy as the wisdom hierarchy:
The theoretical and philosophical discussion has two major branches: information philosophy, focusing on the nature of information; and knowledge management, which contributes to notions of knowledge.
Whilst these fields are distinct, it may be difficult to justify any discussion on information that does not also explore knowledge and vice versa.
Floridi identifies six approaches to the definition of information (communication theory, probabilistic, modal, systemic, inferential, semantica).
Recently there has been a new formulation: Information philosophy, which focuses on ‘the critical investigation of the conceptual nature and basic principles of information, including its dynamic.
Plato first defined knowledge as ‘justified true belief’ and this concept has been debated over the centuries. Drawing on these depates, suggest that knowledge ‘can be conceived as information put to productive use’.
Kakabadse et al propose five different knowledge management perspectives: philosophy-based, cognitive, network, community, and quantum.