One of the most striking similarities between technical communication and knowledge management is that neither field has a comprehensive, widely accepted definition; the definitions that currently exist are variable and highly contextualized (Wick 515). However, this is not the only connection between the two disciplines; there exists an overlap between the purposes of technical communication and knowledge management. As the economy becomes increasingly knowledge-based, and knowledge management becomes a key business component and strategy, the visibility of technical communication as a distinct field is potentially compromised. Even as technical communicators continue striving toward an encompassing and comprehensible definition of the field, technical communication is gradually being absorbed into the more widely recognized, but no less nebulous, field of knowledge management. As Corey Wick observes, “Even though the principles and competencies of technical communication are growing in value to people outside our field, this value is unfortunately falling under the rubric of ‘knowledge management’ and not technical communication” (522).

Technical communication as a coherent discipline is still relatively invisible to those outside the field, so the issue becomes one of recognition. This issue of recognition is complicated by the ascendancy of knowledge management in the corporate world. As a result of the two disciplines’ similarities in theory, purpose, and action, technical communication is increasingly being absorbed into knowledge management departments. However, this development is not without controversy as it is not yet clear what ramifications the knowledge management organizational strategy will have on technical communication as a discipline. Thus, the question remains whether technical communication should become an integrated branch of knowledge management or maintain its separate identity. However, the question does not end there. If knowledge management is an appropriate framework for technical communication, how should technical communicators define their roles in knowledge management systems? Perhaps more importantly, how do technical communicators want others in their organizations to perceive them?

Knowledge Management Explained

Although a comprehensive and authoritative definition of knowledge management does not currently exist, it may be useful to first identify the general components of the discipline before examining the potential role of technical communication within the field. To begin, knowledge management differentiates between knowledge and information: “although both center on meaning, knowledge deals with beliefs and is ‘essentially related to human action’” (Hughes 276). An analogy from education offers an alternative way to look at the differences; while information might be equated with students’ rote memorization of facts, knowledge pertains to students’ ability to understand, interpret, and apply those facts to a variety of learning contexts. Businesses’ descriptions of knowledge management emphasize the discipline’s application of information. According to Patti Anklam, “Knowledge Management is a collection of business practices that promote an integrated approach to the creation, capture, organization, access and use of enterprise knowledge—knowledge about products, processes, systems” (36).

Information may be knowledge management’s currency, but the discipline is primarily concerned with the communication and application of this information within the organization by departments and individuals. Knowledge management involves the “’the broad processes of locating, transferring and more efficiently using information and expertise within an enterprise’” (Newell et al. 1). Knowledge management is in the business of fostering “communities of practice” and preserving institutional memory. With these values in mind, Maria Guiao Babilon and Mary Ann Kabel assert that “The chief benefit of Knowledge Management is the reuse and sharing of knowledge” (Babilon and Kabel).

The Technical Communication—Knowledge Management Connection

Based on these definitions of knowledge management, it seems as though many technical communicators are already knowledge management practitioners. Michael Hughes explains this relationship between user-centered technical communication practices and knowledge management: “By reinterpreting technical information in user contexts, [technical communicators] are creating new knowledge by presenting that information in actionable terms and by relating it to specific applications” (276). This fundamental connection appears to encourage the development of an organizational association between technical communication and knowledge management. Moreover, it makes sense for technical communication to operate under the aegis of a more widely recognized discipline that is growing in value.

As knowledge management gains visibility and popularity in the business world, an association with knowledge management may help make technical communication’s worth more apparent within businesses. Additionally, technical communication rarely functions as an independent entity within a business and is frequently part of larger departments like client services or marketing. Since there are numerous theoretical similarities between knowledge management and technical communication, it is appropriate for technical communication to be incorporated into knowledge management. Furthermore, the knowledge management label may serve as a unifying function within technical communication, connecting practitioners to other groups that work within knowledge management.

However, the longevity and viability of knowledge management as a corporate practice is still in question. Knowledge management may prove to be simply a business fad. If this proves true, where will this leave technical communication? Will the field suffer from the association? Consequently, technical communication should not blindly jump onto the knowledge management bandwagon. Technical communication may certainly benefit from an association with knowledge management in the short-term, but it must also plan for its long-term viability and maintain a semi-independent identity within knowledge management departments. The challenge will be to reach a balance between the two potentially competing objectives. Although the identifying label of knowledge management might help technical communication work toward establishing a fixed identity, it would help only in part. Rather than focusing on the self-identification issue, it would be better to advertise technical communication’s contributions through the work done by its practitioners and their emphasis on user-centered approaches. Technical communicators can be enthusiastic members of knowledge management communities, but they should still maintain connections and alliances with other departments for both recognition and self-preservation. Technical communication existed before the advent of knowledge management, and it will continue to exist after knowledge management evolves into another business strategy.

Drawbacks to the Technical Communication—Knowledge Management Connection

Despite the benevolent characterization of knowledge management portrayed in the abbreviated definitions, knowledge management systems may not be completely positive for technical communicators. The primary drawback pertains to the role of technical communicators within these systems. Much of the literature related to knowledge management fails to mention technical communication directly. Furthermore, technical communicators in the workplace often do not hold high profile knowledge management positions: “technical communicators most of the time fill supporting roles not leading ones” (Wick 522). The problem is that even as organizations and departments evolve, technical communication’s stature remains subsidiary. The paucity of technical communicators in upper-level knowledge management positions denotes organizations’ failure to recognize the discipline’s importance and “perpetuates [technical communication’s] history of underempowerment and obscurity” (Wick 522).

Technical communicators are even overlooked in discussions of who will create and subsequently benefit from knowledge management tools. Anklam illustrates the point by providing this excerpt: “’The focus of the SIG is on how people communicate and interact with computer systems. SIGCHI serves as a forum for the exchange of ideas among computer scientists, human factors scientists, psychologists, social scientists, systems designers and end users’” (39). Anklam then notes, “It is interesting that ‘technical writer’ is absent from this list,” particularly since technical communicators could certainly benefit from the described program (39). In her discussion of knowledge management’s use of corporate intranets, Claire M. Vishik states that “Domain experts, internal information brokers, information experts and users cooperate in creating, finding, collocating Intranet resources and refining retrieval and management tools” (Vishik 113). Once again, there is no mention of technical communication.

This disregard of technical communication in knowledge management, unintentional as it may well be, batters the discipline’s collective ego. However, technical communication’s virtual invisibility has other, perhaps more immediate and practical, implications. Anklam explains the potential fallout:

In our company, the question of whether the competency of technical writers is ‘core’ or can be outsourced led to a model in which the writing staff was maintained in a ‘services’ organization—outside of the actual systems development group. Came time to downsize, the technical writing staff was not core: it could be outsourced. (42)

My current work experience reflects this anxiety concerning job security. At this time, I am a temporary office worker in an information management department of a multinational corporation. I was hired primarily for my writing skills and my experience in developing web content, but the implication is that my communication skills are useful but ultimately disposable. My position certainly lacks status and will eventually be terminated. It is simply a matter of when.

Yet, it is in businesses’ best interest to retain technical communicators as long-term employees. Anklam explains that these workers play a vital, though often underappreciated role, in the business: “Writers and editors who are embedded in organizations, as full time employees and partners with engineers, are carriers of organizational memory” (42). Anklam continues, explaining the nature of institutional memory in terms that ring with knowledge management undertones: “Institutional memory is not just knowledge about history and past events, it is context knowledge. That is, it is not just Know-What, Know-How, Know-Who, Know-When, but also Know-Why” (42). If organizations are truly invested in knowledge management, they should recognize the crucial contributions of technical communicators in developing and compiling this organizational knowledge. However, in order to be recognized for this occupational function, technical communicators must make their knowledge contributions known to the organization.

Advantages of the Technical Communication—Knowledge Management Connection

Although much of the focus has been on the negative aspects of technical communication’s position within knowledge management, there are positive opportunities for technical communication. For one, knowledge management can help workplace technical communicators move beyond a focus on forms, and emphasize the discipline’s rhetorical foundation. Wick explains by describing growth in the knowledge management field as “an opportunity for technical communication to grow beyond its product-centered role in organizations and knowledge management toward a competence-based role that lets us capitalize on emerging business drivers” (523). Anklam goes beyond the rhetorical aspects of knowledge management, and emphasizes the driving force of human involvement and interaction:

Knowledge management is a lot more about process and quality and how people interact with process and quality than it is about tools. The technology always gets center stage, but it is the hard work of the people who revise, refine, edit, and contextualize, that will make the work valuable. (39)

Emphasizing human agency rather than technological tools bodes well for the future of technical communicators’ status. Anklam continues by indirectly championing technical communicators’ competencies within a knowledge management system: “To build a successful knowledge management system requires staffing of people who understand how to efficiently use the tools, develop and maintain standards for using them, and to coach and train knowledge workers in their use” (42).

Although technical communicators recognize themselves in Anklam’s statement, whom outside the discipline would identify the generic “people” of Anklam’s quotation as technical communicators? The notion still persists that technical communicators, when they are thought of, are considered to be producers of tangible products, usually documentation. To be recognized as more than documentation developers, technical communicators need to broadcast the discipline’s paradigm shift outside of the technical communication community. Within the community, we discuss our diverse roles, but does the outside world know how we see ourselves? We know why they should know and care, but they seem to remain unaware of our contributions, both actual and potential. If technical communicators want to be recognized and valued professionally, they will need to be proactive and self-advocate.

Promoting Technical Communication in KM and in the Organization

The first step towards becoming proactive and advocating for technical communication’s secure and recognized position within knowledge management should be self-recognition within the field. Technical communicators need to clearly identify their roles within knowledge management before asking others to acknowledge them. Initially, technical communicators should build themselves up by repeating ego-boosting mantras: “Technical communicators can be key contributors to enterprise initiatives in learning about, piloting, and implementing knowledge management practices” (Anklam 36). However, instead of insular self-promotion, it might be better to analyze exactly how technical communication fits into knowledge management practices. Wick suggests finding the connections between the two fields, stating that there are “correlations between knowledge management and what technical communicators produce (knowledge documents), what technical communicators do, and what technical communicators have always done” (523). Anklam agrees with this idea, but looks at specific technical communication practices:

Changes in the tools we use, the content of what we write about, the audiences for whom we write, the media available to us for publishing, and the very reasons why people look for and read what we write. These are all topics for designing and participating in the evolution of knowledge management systems. (37)

However, Anklam does not simply stop with these particulars, but continues by encouraging a rhetorical approach within technical communication, and by extension, knowledge management: “I also believe that we are going to need to come back to a more core competency that made us valuable in the first place: our ability to connect, make connections, and make context” (41). It is through the flexibility and creativity of a rhetorical approach that technical communicators will establish their value to an organization. The significance of the rhetorical approach is not lost on Wick, who indicates its potential for forward-thinking, an attribute often of organizational value: “By shifting our attention away from the products of our efforts and onto the talents, knowledge, and abilities with which we produce them, we develop a consciousness not of what is, but of what is possible, not of what we do but of what we can do” (524).

Once technical communication practitioners have identified their roles and their importance within knowledge management, the next step involves convincing the rest of the organization that they are capable of more than document production and that their less visible rhetorical skills are valuable. The task becomes one of persuading the organization of technical communication’s inherent and perhaps intangible value. Technical communicators must make themselves visible and promote their abilities and skills within the organization.

The Corporate Intranet as a Promotional Tool

Although humans are the most important resource in both technical communication and knowledge management, technological tools can serve a significant purpose for promoting and establishing technical communicators’ position within an organization. Technical communicators need to achieve mastery with the available technology to meet their professional goals, both the organization’s acknowledged business objectives and the discipline’s objective to achieve recognition and improved status. Wick advocates this strategy: “We must continually search for and develop ways to increase the value that we bring to our organizations. The most obvious ways in which technical communicators can do these things is to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the technologies that serve knowledge management as well as business in general” (525). However, Wick does not promote any specific technologies. One particular technology that could serve as a significant tool to fulfill both aims is the corporate intranet.

In basic terms, an intranet is “a communication tool supporting collaboration, interaction, and real-time sharing of corporate information across functional boundaries and organizational levels” (Lai 95). The very nature of corporate intranets can serve the overt and latent goals of technical communicators: “The Intranet is described as a de-centred or open technology, which therefore has the potential for multiple interpretations and effects. At the same time, the Intranet is often promoted as a collaborative communication technology” (Newell et al. 1). Based on this description, users of corporate intranets must approach the technology from a rhetorical perspective. Technical communicators trained in rhetoric are primed to be exceptional users of the intranet, especially since they know that “’The articulation of technology and organization recognizes that neither is fixed but that both are changing in relation to each other, and that technology users play active roles in shaping the design of this articulation’” (Newell et al. 2). Furthermore, technical communicators with an understanding of rhetoric’s role in workplace practice appreciate the importance of “understanding which media and technology to employ for disseminating which types of knowledge for which purpose” (Wick 525). Their knowledge of intranet technology and their ability to shape the same technology to meet the organization’s needs could also be used to establish and promote technical communication’s place within the organization and within knowledge management systems.

The Role of Intranets in Organizations

Through their communicative and evolving nature, corporate intranets can serve a vital function in achieving a business’s knowledge management goals. As Cynthia P. Ruppel and Susan J. Harrington indicate, “Intranets facilitate communication and interaction and create what has been referred to as a ‘knowledge connection’” (38). Intranets began as an electronic method for storing and accessing company documents. Heather E. McNay explains that even today, one of the main benefits of a corporateiIntranet “is to provide a central location for all corporate information and the other is to build a sense of community to a dispersed work force. Most Intranets start as a tool for distributing company policies and benefits information” (197). Although intranets may have begun as repositories of business information and documentation, they have evolved into significant knowledge management tools: “Online networks allow the combining of new knowledge with existing information, and they can generate and systematize knowledge throughout the organization” (Ruppel and Harrington 38).

The intranet’s impact can be seen in the changing interdepartmental and interpersonal dynamics of the organization:

Employees can distribute and communicate their ideas more readily, enabling them to be more involved in the decision-making process. These evolving relationships will help break down functional walls between corporate departments and create more communication among areas and geographically dispersed corporate departments. (Lai 98)

Technical communicators already contribute to the intranet through their traditional role as document developers with their documentation posted on the intranet. However, technical communicators must go beyond this basic use of intranet, discovering and mastering its other communicative features. By doing this, technical communicators will serve two purposes: 1) help meet the organization’s business goals; 2) increase technical communication’s visibility through their proficiency and recognized use of the technology.

The Intranet and Tacit Knowledge

In knowledge management, one of the most valuable, yet least accessible forms of knowledge is tacit knowledge: “It is tacit knowledge that most strongly facilitates learning, builds intellectual capital, and adds value and competitive advantage to organizations because it is more difficult to replicate” (Ruppel and Harrington 37). Furthermore, the success of a corporate intranet as a communication tool rather than simply a documentation repository is depends on the articulation of this tacit knowledge: “The communication aspects of the Intranet will be much more dependent on tacit knowledge, which is embedded in the shared understandings of particular user groups” (Newell et al. 2). Here is one area where technical communicators can apply their communication skills by using intranet applications to make tacit knowledge explicit. This task is an important opportunity for technical communicators to not only help the organization, but to also actively illustrate their capabilities and value. In the role of facilitator, technical communicators can experiment with various intranet programs to access, document, and publish employees’ tacit knowledge. If successful, technical communicators would play an important role in accessing knowledge commodities and intellectual capital, thus adding value to the organization. If technical communicators then publicized their role in this process through “success stories” subsequently published on the intranet, they would not only point out their contributions in knowledge management, but they would also raise the profile of technical communication within the company.

However, before publicizing their success at accessing, organizing, and publishing workers’ tacit knowledge, technical communicators must first facilitate these workers’ use of the intranet. Barbara Ashdown and Kathy Smith explain two obstacles that knowledge managers, and by extension technical communicators, must help workers surmount: “(1) people need help finding information; and (2) they are asking for tools, including guidance and technical support, to help them conduct their own IM processes, preferably from their desktop” (4). The vast amount of information contained in an intranet can be intimidating for some users, and there is the possibility that the overwhelming nature of the technology may deter some workers from making use of it: “Janis L. Gogan writes: ‘Just because a knowledge repository is chockfull doesn’t guarantee it will be used well’” (Babilon and Kabel 3). Instead of simply contributing to the glut of information to be found on the intranet, technical communicators must help users access information and then transform the information into knowledge. Ruppel and Harrington suggest that “Ways to capture informal, internal knowledge may include discussion databases of know-how or ‘lessons learned’” (49). Maria Guiao Babilon and Mary Ann Kabel also offer two specific knowledge management tools technical communicators could help develop: “Two items on a typical IT employee’s wish list were ‘lessons learned’ and access to electronic project binder—interfaces which would contain everything an employee wanted to know about a particular project, project plan, etc.” (1).

Workplace Culture and Intranet Usage

An organization’s philosophy of knowledge has a significant impact on the success of intranet resources and knowledge management practices: “When knowledge is viewed as a process rather than an asset, the emphasis is on creating a proper environment to enable and facilitate the flow of information (Ruppel and Harrington 38). Technical communicators play a significant role as facilitators of this information flow, working to make information accessible and thus promoting knowledge sharing and development. Accessibility is the key, but perhaps more important are workers’ impressions of intranet accessibility. These interpretations are vital to knowledge management’s success, as McNay points out: “Feelings of accessibility combined with company news and announcements can give all of the dispersed employees a feeling of belonging. This community can be taken one step further with the use of discussion groups to share knowledge, promote the exchange of ideas and experiences, and even provide technical support” (McNay 199). The invisible actors in McNay’s suggestions are technical communicators. They will be the ones documenting and publishing the news and announcements. Additionally, they will frequently facilitate discussions and compile responses.

For the exchange of ideas to be profitable, an open, unthreatening corporate environment needs to be cultivated. Ruppel and Harrington explain that “Cultural values for KM are ‘openness and honesty, sincere service attitude toward membership,’ and a ‘high trust culture for shared learning’” (40). The issue then revolves around the behaviors technical communicators must demonstrate to facilitate this culture of trust within the organization. The quality of technical communicators’ work might contribute to the employees’ perception of their ethos; the accuracy, accessibility, and usability of their work may be scrutinized, along with their interpersonal approaches to collaboration. To be successful contributors to a knowledge management community, technical communicators need to establish trust with those who knowledge they will be soliciting. It’s imperative that employees both within and outside the knowledge management community know these technical communicators and the type and quality of work they produce. Consequently, technical communicators need to be able to establish a public expression of ownership or authorship of their work.

Publishing on the Intranet

The concept of authorship is compromised by the nature of corporate intranets. Their character of accessibility allows potentially all employees to become writers: “Intranets allow users to take responsibility for creating and maintaining their own data” (Lai 99). Babilon and Kabel offer an office analogy: “Think of the collection as a file drawer, with the employee responsible for maintaining the documents and files within the file drawer” (2). Since users are responsible for their own web content: “This makes the Intranet a community effort rather than an IS effort” (McNay 199). Granted, this democratic quality helps users have a more vested interest in the intranet, but technical communicators’ specialization seems devalued by the plethora of users writing and publishing on the intranet. The question becomes what can technical communicators do to make their work stand out and be valued? This may be where technical communication’s knowledge management aspects come into play: “Companies are starting to realize that all those tools in the hands of the writers (content producers) has produced an unarchitected, unedited, and poorly produced corporate opus” (Anklam 38). In the context of the intranet, technical communicators may move away from documentation to become information designers, content editors, and knowledge managers. Yet, these titles denote “behind-the-scenes” work; technical communicators’ contributions may still go unrecognized.

Conclusion

It seems that in the current business climate, technical communication fits, though imperfectly, within the knowledge management paradigm. Incorporating technical communication into knowledge management satisfies multiple functions. The activities technical communication engages in, like accessing users’ knowledge and applying it to varied purposes, support the driving principle behind knowledge management. In essence, both disciplines complement each other and work to achieve the same organizational objective: encouraging all employees, individually and collectively, to use knowledge effectively to meet their organization’s goals. However, the drawback to this marriage of technical communication and knowledge management is the character of its imbalanced partnership. Knowledge management receives the recognition, while technical communication remains subsidiary, nearly invisible. Yet, it is not impossible or unreasonable for the component parts of the department to want recognition for their individual contributions. Knowledge management is not technical communication; knowledge managment is comprised of other departments that require skills and knowledge outside the scope of technical communication. Consequently, it is feasible for knowledge management’s composite departments to maintain vestiges of their independent identities. The problem is that technical communication is still conflicted about its own identity. Although finding a suitable, universal label to describe what it is we practice would go a long way toward eliminating the discipline’s ongoing identity crisis, this naming may not be the complete solution. Rather, within organizations, it may be more effective for technical communicators to focus on using their varied and valuable skills to meet the organization’s needs. If they satisfy the business, and use corporate technologies to communicate their roles in satisfying those business objectives, technical communicators will be at least one step closer toward enduring professional recognition.

Works Cited

Anklam, Patti. “Technical Communications as Knowledge Management: Evolution of a Profession.” ACM Special Interest Group for Design of Communications: Proceedings of the 17th annual international conference on computer documentation 1999: 36 – 44. ACM Digital Library. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 7 April 2005. .

Ashdown, Barbara, and Kathy Smith. “Development of a Model for Managing Organizational Knowledge.” OSTI 1999: 1-7. Eserver TC Library 4 April 2005 .

Babilon, Maria Guiao, and Mary Ann Kabel. “The Evolution of Knowledge Management Within NCR Corporation.” ACM Special Interest Group for Design of Communications: Proceedings of the 16th annual international conference on Computer documentation 1998: 1-4. ACM Digital Library. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 5 April 2005. .

Hughes, Michael. “Moving from Information Transfer to Knowledge Creation: A New Value Proposition for Technical Communicators.” Technical Communication. 49.3. August 2002: 275-285.

Lai, Vincent S. “Intraorganizational Communication with Intranets.” Communications of the ACM 44.7 July 2001: 95-100. ACM Digital Library. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 5 April 2005. .

Newell, Sue, Harry Scarbrough, Jacky Swan, and Donald Hislop. “Intranets and Knowledge Management: Complex Processes and Ironic Outcomes.” Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Jan. 1999: 1-10. IEEE Xplore. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 6 April 2005. .

McNay, Heather E. “Corporate Intranets: Building Communities with Data.” Proceedings of 2000 Joint IEEE International and 18th Annual Conference on Computer Documentation Sept. 2000: 197-201. IEEE Xplore. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 6 April 2005. .

Ruppel, Cynthia P. and Susan J. Harrington. “Sharing Knowledge Through Intranets: A Study of Organizational Culture and Intranet Implementation.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 44.1. March 2001: 37-52. IEEE Xplore. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 6 April 2005. .

Vishik, Claire M. “Internal Information Brokering and Patterns of Usage on Corporate Intranets.” Conference on Supporting Group Work: Proceedings of the international ACM SIGGROUP conference on supporting group work: the integration challenge 1997: 111-118. ACM Digital Library. Parks Library, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. 7 April 2005. .

Wick, Corey. “Knowledge Management and Leadership Opportunities for Technical Communicators.” Technical Communication. 2000: 515-529.