[ASC-list] The (blurry?) line between communication and knowledge sharing

Jennifer Metcalfe jenni at econnect.com.au
Mon Jul 14 19:59:03 UTC 2014

I’ve always thought that ‘knowledge broker’ was just a fancy term for communicator…
It was invented to make communication sound more important and palatable to those who don’t value the role properly…

Science communicators have a variety of roles and knowledge broker or manager is just one of those many roles… an important one, especially when facilitating the sharing of knowledge between scientists and others…


Jenni Metcalfe
PhD Student at University of Nottingham, Sociology Dept, UK, Feb-August, 2014
Universitas 21 exchange from the University of Queensland, Australia
Director, Econnect Communication, www.econnect.com.au<http://www.econnect.com.au/>
Mobile: UK +44 (0) 7473 109 685; or Australia +61 (0) 408 551 866
jenni at econnect.com.au<mailto:jenni at econnect.com.au>
skype: jenni.metcalfe
twitter: @JenniMet

From: ASC-list [mailto:asc-list-bounces at lists.asc.asn.au] On Behalf Of Michelle Kovacevic
Sent: Monday, 14 July 2014 7:17 AM
To: asc-list at lists.asc.asn.au
Subject: [ASC-list] The (blurry?) line between communication and knowledge sharing

Hi ASC-ers,

Over the past few months I've been introduced to the concepts of knowledge management and knowledge sharing, but to be honest I still don't know where the the role of "communicator" ends and "knowledge manager/sharer/broker" begins.

It seems one of the postulated differences is that communication is a "one-way" process of information provision and passive reception, whereas knowledge sharing is more of holistic process, connecting users and producers of information (knowledge? semantics?) so they can co-create a "knowledge product" that serves multiple needs.

To date, my job as a "science communicator" has involved aspects of writing, editing, multimedia, project management, education, data management, training, PR and research, amongst other things.

To me, effective communication cannot be defined a passive, one way process if it truly wishes to be effective and I don't think, as a science communicator, I have ever practiced it as such.

Would be keen for the community's thoughts on whether we should be calling ourselves communicators vs when we might be knowledge managers/brokers? Or does it even matter what we call ourselves?



Michelle Kovacevic
Communicator. Educator. Project Manager. Scientist. Creative Thinker.
michellekovacevic.com<http://michellekovacevic.com> (beta)
Find me on: LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=66994213> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/kovamic> | SlideShare<https://www.slideshare.net/MichelleKovacevic>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.lists.sublimeip.com/pipermail/asc-list/attachments/20140714/210247b0/attachment.htm>

More information about the ASC-list mailing list