During a discussion about "information habits" I recently heard a comment that in some organizational cultures, obtaining information from a trusted colleague is preferred over obtaining it from an impersonal source - regardless how authoritative that impersonal source may be. Reflecting on the popularity of story telling as a topic at conferences, I considered the comfort there is in hearing information from someone we consider to be an expert and someone we know would not go with less than solid information: "If Anna relies on that number, so can I". What is the implication for information professionals?
Hearing information live from a trusted colleague offers the opportunity to ask questions or probe for more detail - something we can't do in front of a list of search results. Moreover, when we don't personally know the reputations of authors of particular items ... how can we avoid the experience of pointing to a document only to be told by a subject matter expert, "that author is known to hold some unusual views"?
Of course, there's the experiential factor. Sure, in preparing for the upcoming conference in London, I could have found out on the relevant website about the tube's recent innovation, the refillable Oyster card ... it was a lot faster and more enjoyable to hear it straight from my niece, complete with her own personal tips. It is understandable that knowledge workers seek each other out.
The trick for those who work in supplying information to knowledge workers is to work both avenues. If the right information lands on the right desks at the right time ... we may hope the owners will eventually talk to each other. But it is essential that we act as 'people connectors', linking one person with another who can take the role of trusted colleague. In both ways, we will then be part of the 'oral culture' in a manner consistent with our professional practice.
Comments