I am inclined to think that an expression such as a "quanta" can indeed be
used in this context, given that knowledge tends to come in "bundles" and a
certain subset of knowledge is required in order for any given piece of
knowledge to make any sense. But as to the rest of the paper, I have no
idea exactly what the point is. However, judging by the responses, I think
my advice would be never to fall in love with your theory. At least, define
what is meant by the term "organisational intelligence", such that we may
begin our deliberations from a less ignorant standpoint. If by
organisational intelligence, you are referring to information, then
intelligence is the wrong word to use. Intelligence is what you may need in
order to make sense of your data. Extraction of "information" from data is
of course related to Information Theory (of which there is a great deal of
research and, yes, formulae) and Data Mining.
"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
news:lAhcb.115$ld2.14850086_at_mantis.golden.net...
> "mountain man" <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote in message
> news:Xoecb.120925$bo1.32284_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
>
http://www.mountainman.com.au/software/Theory_of_Organizational_Intelligence
> .htm
> >
> > What is computerized organizational intelligence?
>
> Mindless marketing horseshit. plonk
>
>
Received on Mon Oct 13 2003 - 11:15:46 CDT
