The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy

Abstract

This paper revisits the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy by examining the articulation of the hierarchy in a number of widely read textbooks, and analysing their statements about the nature of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. The hierarchy referred to variously as the ‘Knowledge Hierarchy’, the ‘Information Hierarchy’ and the ‘Knowledge Pyramid’ is one of the fundamental, widely recognized and ‘taken-for-granted’ models in the information and knowledge literatures. It is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but there has been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy. After revisiting Ackoff’s original articulation of the hierarchy, definitions of data, information, knowledge and wisdom as articulated in recent textbooks in information systems and knowledge management are reviewed and assessed, in pursuit of a consensus on definitions and transformation processes. This process brings to the surface the extent of agreement and dissent in relation to these definitions, and provides a basis for a discussion as to whether these articulations present an adequate distinction between data, information, and knowledge. 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, leading to a lack of definitional clarity. In addition, there is limited reference to wisdom in these texts.

Working with tacit knowledge: An empirical investigation in glass blowing tradition in Sweden

“…The assumption is that data can be used to create information; information can be used to create knowledge, and knowledge can be used to create wisdom (Rowley, 2007). (Rowley, 2007) Ackoff (1989) whom this pyramid is attributed to, argues that although there is a tendency to use these concepts interchangeably, not only they are different but they also form a hierarchy of increasing value. The distinction between data/information and knowledge according to Nissen (2006) is specifically obvious where tacit knowledge is involved.…”

Information and the gaining of understanding

“…This seems to have been lost from most subsequent presentation of the hierarchy. Rowley points out that most commentators have suggested that understanding is not a separate level [3], while Frické simply notes that it is not typically included [4]. And certainly, understanding is not a distinct state, divorced from the others: as Winograd and Flores put it, "what we understand is based on what we know, and what we already know comes from being able to understand" [5].…”

Economics of Strategic Knowledge Management: A New Model for Assessment

“…Knowledge management (KM) is one of the emerging topics of academic and professional discourse in many fields of knowledge, including cognitive sciences, sociology, management science, information science (IS), knowledge engineering, artificial intelligence, and economics [6,18,22,23,33,39,41] Knowledge integration can broadly be defined as the processes by which several individuals combine their information and uniquely held knowledge to create new knowledge; and also Knowledge management (KM) is considered a strategic and value-added endeavor for improving an organization's effectiveness in the changing social and business environment [14]. Drucker [11,12] described knowledge, rather than capital or labor as the only meaningful resource in the knowledge society, and Senge [36] has warned that many organizations are unable to function as knowledge based organizations, because they suffer from learning disabilities.…”