By Shelley Hayduk
The way we represent, organize and share our knowledge propels us forward. It can either constrain or extend our abilities to think and create. In 1964, in his groundbreaking new media studies, Marshall McLuhan proposed that it is the medium, not just the content it carries, that impacts our lives. This is captured most eloquently in his most famous line: "The medium is the message."
I propose that the means by which we organize and access information are a part of that medium. So essentially when you open a folder or e-mail to get a document, it's not just about the information we access -- the organizational structure of our content itself has meaning. If this is true, what are our current paradigms for information management and how much have they progressed today?
Digital Filing Cabinets
In 1886, Henry Brown invented the filing cabinet (known then as "receptacle for storing and preserving paper"). Next, Edwin Siebel's innovation of vertical paper storage in 1896 revolutionized record-keeping. For the first time in history, we had a way to capture and store volumes of information in a manner that increased efficiency and organization without the need for the laborious process of binding knowledge into books.
Now with the advent of the computer, the Internet, cloud-based computing and social networking, surely Henry Brown would be impressed. Or would he? While some may look back on the industrial-age methods of yore with disdain, we have to acknowledge that we are still using these 19th-century paradigms despite our huge leaps in technology. Check out your computer desktop. We all still open our folders, and pull out our files (from our very big albeit digital filing cabinets). So it seems that we have successfully digitized our industrial age tools. Hmmm...
To be sure, thinking about and modeling computers as the ultimate digital filing cabinet over the last several decades has been pervasive and not without its successes. The graphical user interface took us from DOS-era, text-based commands to an icon-based version of our physical office. It was a natural transition people new to computers could easily grasp. And for the most part, whether you're on a Mac or PC you are still using folders to organize at least some of your information.
But as useful as this filing metaphor is, in the Internet era it places unnecessary constraints on our information. This paradigm also limits the design and usability of many information management programs. Even the latest enterprise document management systems and portal technology like SharePoint are still collaborative hierarchies for file sharing. This problem of linear information access is further exacerbated when dealing with diverse groups of users. It is also an opportunity lost. When I access the sales reports, why not have them connected to relevant deals in play, products sold and key expertise? The lack of context means people just don't discover more relevant information. Things are overlooked.
Simply put, our brains naturally extend beyond our filing cabinets. We think associatively. Ideas and documents rarely fit into just one folder. As a result critical information gets buried, duplicated, or lost. We end up searching through our rigid directories and, more importantly, fail to capture the connections and relationships that crystalize our knowledge and drive our businesses.
Moving Beyond Information Hierarchies
The premise of organizing information by its relationships is both simple and incredibly powerful. If a piece of information can only be categorized hierarchically (in one place), you are missing every other valuable connection it might have. In our networked world, the inadequacy of the notion that single context can handle all cases is obvious for all but the simplest types of information. An idea might fit under a variety of categories and have many relationships -- the people involved, the steps to implement it, the assumptions upon which it depends, its sources of inspiration, and so on.
In this very publication in 1945, Vannevar Bush theorized a rudimentary thinking machine in "As We May Think." He described the "Memex" -- a tool to capture human thought and digitize our memories. His concept was based on simulating a system much more powerful than our filing cabinets: the human mind. Bush was calling for a new relationship between our thinking, the tools we use and the knowledge we possess.
Speaking of systems for indexing and filing information, much like those still in use today, Bush noted that, "The human mind does not work that way. It operates by association. With one item in its grasp, it snaps instantly to the next that is suggested by the association of thoughts, in accordance with some intricate web of trails carried by the cells of the brain."