[Year 12 IPM] Data vs Information

[Donna Benjamin]

Data vs Information

I've not been following super closely, so this may have come up - but  
the challenge of defining data vs information definition debate is  
tackled in both the information science and knowledge management  
fields...  and often abbreviated as DIKW.

Google for "data information knowledge wisdom" and you'll be tipped  
head down the rabbit hole into a range of articles and resources on  
this topic.

But - for those who don't have time - here's a bit of copy and paste :-)

cheers
Donna

    1. Data: symbols
    2. Information: data that are processed to be useful;
         provides answers to "who", "what", "where", and "when"  
questions
    3. Knowledge: application of data and information; answers "how"  
questions
    4. Understanding: appreciation of "why"
    5. Wisdom: evaluated understanding.
( from http://www.systems-thinking.org/dikw/dikw.htm )

In the context of KM the following distinctions can be made:
     * Data: bits of information such as lists (e.g. phone list) or  
records in a database or spreadsheet
     * Information: organized data that can be communicated
     * Knowledge: information (i.e. organized data) that can be used  
to achieve some or other result
     * Wisdom: selection of appropriate knowledge for a specific task
( from http://www.knowsystems.com/km/definition.html )

The Hierarchy
The Data Information Knowledge and Wisdom Hierarchy (DIKW) is  
commonly referred to by many names. In most of the "Knowledge  
Management" literature the hierarchy is referred to as the "Knowledge  
Hierarchy", while the information science domain refers to the same  
hierarchy as "Information Hierarchy" for obvious reasons. Sometimes  
it is also referred to as the "Knowledge Pyramid".
( from http://www-personal.si.umich.edu/~nsharma/dikw_origin.htm )


donna benjamin - executive director
http://www.creativecontingencies.com/
ph +61 3 9326 9985 | mob +61 418 310 414
research - facilitation - web development



On 25/08/2005, at 7:38 PM, Peter Ruwoldt (Wrk) wrote:

> I agree 100% - "Just because data is collated and sorted and  
> summarised does not make it more than data".
> However, if that processing of data gives me something that I find  
> useful, that helps me make informed decisions - that I call  
> information.  'Information that is not useful' - there is a  
> contradiction.  Information is what is used to become informed.   
> When you are informed you have something that is useful - now that  
> you are informed you can consider this in you decision making.  The  
> stuff that your boss is feeding you at a staff meeting is called  
> fodder or data.
>
> Agreed - IT should be called 'data processing'.
>
> Peter
>
>
> Mike Brookes wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Peter et al
>> Not if you use my first definition :-)
>>
>> Just because information is not useful does not mean that it is  
>> not information.
>>
>> (how much of the information that you gain at a staff meeting do  
>> you find useful - oops sorry boss just kidding)
>>
>> Just because data is collated and sorted and summarised does not  
>> make it more than data, however it is data that would make it  
>> easier for the reader to gain more information.
>>
>> The confusion bought about by the hijacking of these terms is  
>> because a so called "Information Processing" system does not  
>> process information - it processes DATA. Its purpose is to gather,  
>> process, store and display the data in a form that makes it easier  
>> for PEOPLE to interpret and gain understanding (information) about  
>> a thing or situation.
>>
>> Mike Brookes
>> Chief cook and bottlewasher
>> Copperfield College
>>
>> Peter Ruwoldt (Wrk) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> What is information to one person is data to another. (aka - one  
>>> person's garbage is anothers treasure)
>>> Consider the scenario of a person from the health commission  
>>> asking students to complete a health survey.  The fact that an  
>>> individual student smokes is not useful to the person from the  
>>> health commission.  Sure they are concerned that a youth chooses  
>>> to smoke.  The fact that YOU as an individual smokes is going to  
>>> be useful information to your parents but not the health  
>>> commission.  When they gather all of the data and find out that  
>>> it is mainly 14-19 year old females that smoke they have some  
>>> information that they can use which will helpful in better  
>>> targeting their quit campaign.
>>> Now we can weave drug education into information technology -  
>>> that's called value adding.
>>> Cheers
>>> Peter