The KMS described above introduces the second e-Research issue that IS needs to address – the interaction of the research and practice domains.
The idea that research results need to be socially useful is not new either. The nature of knowledge, its production and use, has long been a topic of debate and academic research. In Australia, research has been largely a publicly funded activity, and government is now casting an increasingly critical eye over the way it is currently performed. DEST’s research network initiative (the context in which this paper is written) is the latest in a series of moves to promote interdisciplinary research that aims to create and apply knowledge to address problems of national significance. Ronayne (1997) put it this way:
In Mode 1 problems are set and solved in a context governed by the interests of a largely academic community. By contrast, Mode 2 knowledge production is carried out within the context of application. It is intended to be useful to someone other than specifically the practitioner, be this industry, government or society generally; and this requirement is present from the beginning.
Batterham (2003) describes Mode 1 as ‘discipline based; distinguishes between theoretical core and its conversion to application’ while Mode 2 is ‘multidisciplinary, team based; Constant flow between basic & applied; Discovery occurs where knowledge is developed and put to use’. The search for integration between research and practice is a priority.
But these are two very different worlds – human activity systems that share knowledge, but not purpose, method or people. The relationship has normally been one of knowledge provision on one side and adoption on the other. There are many examples of effective interoperation projects (for example, in most of Australia’s Cooperative Research Centres).
In this way of thinking, the relationship between research and practice is like that between two organisations engaged in e-Commerce. The currency is knowledge, with practice providing relevance and raw data to theory, and research providing economically useful, causally based knowledge and interventions to practice. Figure 12.2, “Traditional interoperation of research and practice systems.” shows two information systems planes, one for research, the other for practice, with the suggestion of a third interoperation system in between.
E-Commerce, like interoperation between systems, has become a significant part of IS. Recent work in terms of ontologies and the Web (Moody, 2000) and in object orientation, agents, XML, and so on, is accelerating the field. So patterns to support this kind of relationship between research and practice already exist.
But the KMS described earlier implies a different view. It concentrates not on the trading between systems but on sharing what they have in common. It suggests a deeper association of human activity systems, not just ICT mediated communication.