Re: a theory of organizational intelligence

From: Robin Tucker <idontwanttobespammedanymore_at_reallyidont.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 17:15:46 +0100
Message-ID: <bmej0b$pn5$1$8302bc10_at_news.demon.co.uk>


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 [Quoted] [Quoted]
> 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 - 18:15:46 CEST

Original text of this message