If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’d better be thinking.

Thinking is the “using of one’s mind actively to form connected ideas”.

If you’re not thinking, you’ve missed the point of working with documentation and knowledge. Thinking, along with creativity, separates us from evermore effective artificial intelligence.

Quickly replying to emails, dashing out a quick report, or writing the technical specification just moments before it needs to go out the door, does not allow the time to use your mind actively to form connected ideas.

Thinking is so important. Every document deserves the time needed for the thinking bit.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, the step often missed is planning.

It’s so quick and easy to create documents now. For comparison, think back 40 years (those who can) and remember the typewriter and the blue carbon paper for copies. Slow and deliberate was the norm.

Now, need to write a report? Find an old one and just search and replace with new information. Need to send an email? Just find a random past one from the same person and reply about the new topic (without changing the subject header).

There are more professional ways to plan documentation.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, there comes a time when you’ll have to review other people’s writing.

It usually comes with an oblique “please review and comment”.

It’s even more complicated when the request is emailed to a group.

I remember the olden days (!) when there was one copy of the document, with a list of names attached. Reviews were one at a time. It was cleverly set out that the most senior person reviewed first, so the juniors learned what was being commented on.

Of course, that’s too inefficient in this just-in-time environment. But maybe not.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll often or occasionally do a peculiar action of ‘redirecting’ it.

By redirecting, I mean that after you’ve read it, written it, edited it, used it and / or approved it, it will probably need to be redirected, to the right person with the right expectations (next step) outlined.

We’re not really taught clear or efficient ways to redirect documents or knowledge. We just wing it around by email or casual conversation.

A redirection without explanation puts more work on the receiver. Redirection with clear expectations: that’s the better way to do it.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll need to store that documentation or knowledge efficiently.

This might be one of the most overlooked aspect of documentation and knowledge: how to store it so that it can be found again.

Every organisation will have its own storage system, whether it’s a fancy smart database or good old-fashioned X: drive folders. Or even more old-fashioned: hardcopy folders in drawers. (I have all three types).

There’s no shortage of ways documents could be stored; the important thing is to have an agile personal methodology based on principles that make sense to you.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll undoubtedly be utilising that documentation, knowledge, data, or information, for something required in your daily tasks.

Preferably, in the act of using that knowledge, data, or document, you’ll be adding value.

Pushing information across your desk, or in-and-out of the inbox, without adding value to it, diminishes your role and makes you expendable.

It’s better for everyone – including your organisation – to use the information by putting it through that black box that is your mind (which encompasses your own knowledge, skills, and experience), and making it more valuable on the other side.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll be looking for, and retrieving, information often.

It’s common to be thinking to ourselves, or, hearing a co-worker say: “just let me find it…” or, “now where did I put that…”, or “I know it’s around here somewhere”.

Being able to quickly find what you’re looking for is a relief – and a time-saver.

The ease in the ability to create documentation has meant we have more of it than ever. Finding ways to store and file it so that it can be easily retrieved later is a bit like chasing a dream.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll possibly have approving to do.

The act of approval, in the context of documentation or records, is a conscious act not to be taken lightly. It is expected that the approver is aware of the content of the document or record that they are ‘signing off’.

“Approved” documents have more weight and authority than draft or unsigned (unapproved) ones. Approval means, in the case of project records, the content is accurate. It means that in the case of project plans, specifications or designs, the content is correct and expected to be followed.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll possibly have editing to do.

Actually, if you write at all, you should also plan the time to edit. Editing is the action of ‘correcting, revising and proof-reading’ for errors. So, if you write and don’t edit, then an important step is missing in clarifying and ‘tidying up’ your writing.

Of course, the scale of editing is directly associated with length and purpose of the writing (i.e., email vs. project close-out report)

It’s also important when you have a role to review others’ work: you will have to be in editor mode.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll always have writing to do.

Possibly, though, we write too much. Writing thousands of words for others to read can be ineffective. You may need to write those thousands of words to get your head around your point, but consider reducing it to a couple of hundred when communicating with others.

Writing is a key mode of communication. Early in our lives we learn how to write (and read and talk). As we enter and progress through corporate life, it seems like we write more and more but communicate less and less.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’ll always have reading to do.

With the thousands of words coming at us every day, all day, it’s common to feel overwhelmed. This is an even bigger issue in the current times, with communication over the screen rather than in person.

Thing is, it’s not going away.

Reading speed varies but averages at 300wpm. There’s about 300 words on a page. So, a 25-page document will take 30minutes to read properly. There’s no way around it: the time must be put aside. And yes, it might mean something else doesn’t get done.

There’s a continuum that we’re always on when it comes to documentation and knowledge. It’s like an infinity symbol, and we’re just moving along and back and up and around this continuum.

If you deal with documentation or knowledge, you’re always doing one of these activities: reading, writing, editing, approving, retrieving, using, storing, redirecting, reviewing, planning, or thinking.

Considering that we’re always doing one of those activities, it’s fair to think we’d have effective and efficient ways to do each of them. But alas, I think it’s fair to conclude there’s room for improvement in methodologies around all of them.

I was inspired today hearing an interview with Dave McGillivray. Among many other things he does, he’s the race director for the Boston Marathon. He’s currently pivoted to helping plan vaccination ‘event’ locations – good move.

He observed that in a community, setbacks are often followed by even stronger comebacks. I like that idea.

Examples are the 1950s after WWII, and the 2014 Boston Marathon after the 2013 bombing.

Obviously, we’re in the middle of a setback right now. But won’t the comeback be superb.

This can also apply to smaller events and our personal lives: strong comebacks after a setback.

We’re all in a state of work. Going to work, working hard, putting in the work, busy at work.

To “work” is to take part in an “activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result”. So, all that work done that does not actually achieve a purpose or a result, can be reconsidered…. because it’s not work.

I like the physics equation for work, which equals force times displacement. So that means we exert a force, which causes a change. If there’s no change from the force of our work, then, it isn’t.

On February 10th, 11:30am Brisbane time, I’m continuing the “Beyond 100 words” monthly webinars; this month it is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including recognition of the context with competence.

Competence has context. Without knowing context, we can’t possibly know all the information. Context includes things like background conditions, past history, and participant expectations, and infinite other factors. We also need to be very certain of the why, who and how of measuring competence.

Perspectives change if we’re looking for deep expertise, or wide generalist knowledge. Perspectives on competence also change if the work to be done is repetitive or creative.

A job interview, a promotion, or applying for a credential like chartered accountant or registered engineer inevitably requires the seeker to demonstrate competence.

Some competence is tangible: take a test, build a chair. Some competence is harder to measure: relevant experience; the right problem-solving approach.

Evidence of competence tends to be through stories and recollections by the interviewee of past behaviour in various situations.

On the 10th of each month, I’m giving a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts.

Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am Brisbane time, is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including measurement of competence.

Competency framework assessments require users to declare whether they are ‘competent’, by ranking themselves at some level or some categorisation.

The one liner, “identify your competence level”, is loaded with the unsaid work that is required. It’s not often taught or laid out clearly.

I think competence is assessed through pictures and words (outputs), behaviour (interactions with others), and references (stories people tell about you).

On the 10th of each month, I’m giving a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts.

Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am Brisbane time, is about “credibility beyond credentials”, including defining competence.

On the 10th of each month, I’ll do a 30minute webinar on a topic related to these daily posts. Episode 2, on February 10th 11:30am AEST, is about “credibility beyond credentials”.

Competence and credibility are similar, but not the same. “Competence” can be defined as having knowledge, skills and experience on a task or topic. “Credibility” is about being trusted, convincing and believable. A combination of competence and credibility brings respect.

Competence is simply expected for any role. An accepted method of ‘declaring’ credibility is through credentials – degrees, awards, titles. But there is so much more to it than that.

On the 10th of each month in 2021, I’ll be doing a 30minute webinar on a topic from my daily posts.

Episode 2, February 10th at 11:30am AEST, is about “credibility beyond credentials”.

Sure, credentials are important. But with information so freely available now, and with some credentials easily achieved, credibility is not solely demonstrated by credentials anymore. It’s up to us to display credibility through actions and behaviour.

Structured, organised, demonstrable credibility applies to work-life, as well as hobbies and other goals. Like, say, doing five long-distance triathlons. Achieving that “credential” will be part of this story as well.

The Dewey Decimal System (DDS) is still in use in thousands of libraries around the world. It’s an efficient and consistent way to categorise and store information, by grouping books (knowledge) into standard, expandable categories.

Before the DDS was created in 1876, libraries sorted books in the sequence that they were acquired. That made it difficult to find books later when you’re looking for something specific.

Our email inboxes tend to be more like the 1860s way of storing information. The flexibility is a paradox: because we can sort it any way we want, we don’t sort it at all.