SoylentNews

AnonTechie [soylentnews.org] writes:

In 2002, after a Pentagon news briefing, the then US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld was widely ridiculed [bbc.co.uk] for his thoughts about knowledge. Discussing the issue of whether Iraq was supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists, he said:

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know.

Rumsfeld was describing a world characterised by uncertainty, insecurity and ambiguity. And he actually made a valid point about how leaders face situations where complete knowledge is not, and cannot, be available.

This awareness of a lack of knowledge is something we call a state of “unknowingness”. And our research suggests [sagepub.com] , perhaps surprisingly, that it can be a good thing for leaders and the organisations they run.

[...] We also found that if “unknowingness” is recognised and accepted, it can lead to better decision making across an organisation – and improved leadership overall.

[...] But any organisation which has to deal with “unknowns” (whether they are known or unknown) would benefit from recognising and accepting these particular challenges.

There may be little they can do about the things they don’t even know they don’t know about yet. But when they are aware of the absence of knowledge, and accept an inability to know everything or always make the “right” decision, our research suggests [sagepub.com] that this can actually be a positive step.

The Conversation [theconversation.com]

[Also Covered By]: PHYS.ORG [phys.org]

Original Submission