|

outreach | network name
and approach
navreme as a Slavic word, and
knowledge development as the English second part of the name, both
stand for the cross-roads between Eastern and Western Europe.
navreme stands for
over-coming the still existing iron curtain in our heads, and for
Europe-wide cooperation, including particularly also experts and
partners from the EU’s neighbourhood. Time, apart from the
Greek chronos (linear time), is also kairos,
i.e. circular time or the right moment. Conspicuously, in the English
language, time is the most used word,
according to the Oxford Dictionary.
knowledge development,
on its side, is a culmination of analysis and review of activities.
navreme is a Slavic term for the Greek
‘kairos’. “Kairos, in the Greek mythology
the youngest son of Zeus, is the god for the favourable moment,
fortunate opportunity or the right moment” says
“Mayers Konversationslexikon – Ein Nachschlagewerk
des allgemeinen Wissens” of 1891, a usual starting point for
our presentations. Rather than the chronological notion of time (Greek
‘chronos’), it connotes the concept of
instantaneous ‘ kairos’, the moment to catch, or of
the very right instance, or of internal time.
Kairos was interpreted by the
sculpture artist Lysippos (the preferred sculpturist of Alexander of
Macedonia) in the 4 th century BC.: we see a boy with wings, with long
hair on his front side and shoulders, but bold on the back head: when
the good moment is over, you can not even catch it by its hair from
behind. He carries scales and shearing knife, for making
and balancing the right decision, and acting by
cutting off an opportunity instantaneously.
knowledge development,
rather than pure knowledge management of the same already existing
knowledge, is the activity of creating fresh, timely and tailor-made
knowledge. Activity is not limited to intentional physical movements,
but extends to the preceding activity of thinking, but also consists of
Making (‘changing something’ – 'poiesis')
and Acting (‘in a particular way’ –
'praxis').
In Aristotelian terms of practice
(Rämö 1999), making (poiesis) leads to skillfullness
and proficiency ('techne' – the name of our Danish partner
company!), acting (praxis), promotes wisdom and judgement
('phronesis'). In terms of theory, theoretical activity ('theoria')
promotes scientific skills ('episteme'). This is what contemporary
research is (only) about. However, both theory and practice are merely
two different forms of (an) activity. 'Theoria' means the activity of
investigating the world (and not the resulting scientific documents),
'episteme' is the resulting arrangement of words or concepts that
describes the state of things and affairs.
network name
and activity
The timely development and
application of knowledge is in fact based on new interfaces between
knowledge production and knowledge utilisation:
‘action research’ and
'accompanying research’ are characterised by certain kind of
project-immanent interaction between research project and development
initiative (Kämaräinen 2000). However, it is possible
to develop complementary interfaces that may be linked to other kinds
of research (and development) activities. In the following some ideal
types are outlined as different kinds of bilateral interaction fields
between researchers, policy-makers and practitioners. All these ideal
types can be seen as transformations of one-way communication into a
mutual learning process.
Mutual learning via the transformation
of research dissemination into collaborative learning processes
that is based on the outcomes of certain projects: so far the
accustomed concept of ‘dissemination’ has been
based on the idea that research results are made available and
explained with particular campaigns. However, a more appropriate
interaction between the transnational research projects and potential
(national) contexts of knowledge utilisation can be achieved via an
organised learning process. In such process the participants are
challenged to analyse the context of knowledge utilisation (in which
they are working) and the lessons from the transnational research
project (in view of their analyses).
Mutual learning via the transformation
of monitoring into participative accompaniment of research work and
knowledge sharing: so far the concept of monitoring (of
research projects by the funding agencies) has been based on external
relations and on ‘deliverables’ (such as interim
reports or papers to monitoring seminars). An alternative mode of
monitoring can be developed by making use of electronic communication
in communities of practice and knowledge sharing environments. With the
help of such instruments and the monitoring relation can be transformed
into participative accompaniment of actual steps and knowledge sharing
within research work.
Mutual learning via the transformation
of valorisation into analysis of knowledge processing within knowledge
utilisation: so far the concept of
‘valorisation’ has been overshadowed by different
expectations concerning compression of knowledge and/or of immediate
reflection of ‘user-positions’. However, it is
possible to go beyond these simple solutions and develop
‘valorisation studies’ into analyses on the actual
processing of knowledge in particular contexts of knowledge utilisation
(with reference to certain conceptual inputs that are coming from
transnational research projects).
Finally, activities and knowledge development, in
order to contribute to change, and become sustainable and real, need to
ubicated not only in space (‘choros’) but in a place
(‘topos’). The abstract chronos and
chora have to do with science and theoretical knowledge (episteme and
techne), whereas kairos and a meaningful topos characterise practical
wisdom and judgement (phronesis). The contextual localisation and
application of knowledge means interaction with networks of real people
(not virtual networks! – Attwell 2005). Place is the
“element of an association of ideas, of a conditioning (=
consulting?), of a training, of a mnemonics’ (i.e. devices to
help us remember or aide memoire) (Barthes 1988). Kairotopos
is then the unification of place and time into a condensed, meaningful
and concrete wholeness (Ramirez 1995).
‘Evaluation’ of
people’s projects, programmes or policies, one of our core
fields of expertise, leads to ‘valorisation’ if
added value is made visible; dissemination of collected experience
means knowledge-sharing; accumulated added value is re-invested as a
human and knowledge capital in new undertakings, in order to avoid past
pitfalls, and to achieve better results – thus
‘capitalisation’ of experience.
The concepts 'action research' and 'accompanying
research' in our work refer to research designs in which research work
is linked to development initiatives. The 'action research' approaches
involve more directly researchers as key actors within development
initiatives and practitioners as essential actors within the related
research work. The 'accompanying research' approaches are based an
organised interaction and active dialogue between the development team
and an accompanying research project.
One of our preferred approaches combines the
accompanying research notion with evaluation: ’accompanying
evaluation’. Eventually, evaluation and
valorisation and capitalisation lead to an improvement over time,
better quality, more fun, convincing empowerment – a spiral
of improvement.
network name
and values
Although navreme is working mainly as a
virtual organisation, all of this needs to be done with other
– real – people. The virtual organisation demands
trustworthiness among the participants as spontaneous physical
interaction is often not possible. In a global and virtual setting, trust
is crucial (Luhmann 1979, Giddens 1990) for questions of wisdom and
judgment in actions undertaken. Trust involves elements of
discretionary power beyond instrumental specifications (contracts) and
the rule of 'techne' (Rämö 1999). Trust reduces
complexity and enhances the efficiency of agency. In order to uphold
trust relationships in virtual communications and organisations,
instead of control, calls for elements of 'kairos' and
'phronesis', i.e. having features of 'kairochora'
(actions no longer ‘take place’, but only
‘time’). Whereas chronotopos relies on clock-time
precision in concrete places (project application on spot), kairochora
relies on a notion of right time to act in an abstract virtual space
(project valorisation for knowledge development).
Aristotle, in ‘de categoriae’
defines chronos as the ‘dating time’, and kairos as
the ‘time that gives value’. Kairos is, for
Aristotle’s scheme of rhetoric, the “time and space
context in which the proof will be delivered”. Moreover,
“what happens at the right time (kairos – season)
is good”. In contrast, if
knowledge is deployed too early, it is not accepted; those who are
late, are “punished by history” (cf. Mihajl
Gorbacev). Even the best knowledge, developed on purpose on the basis
of previous experience, is useless, if not delivered ‘on
time’ – i.e. knowledge developed na
vreme (“at the right time”).
Trust, value, good (navreme) and skills,
judgment, wisdom (knowledge development) – what else could we
strive for?
network logo
The logo, developed by the Florentine graphic designer Camilla Torna
(camillatorna@tin.it), as any good logo, allows for several
interpretations and activates the viewer’s creativity. Rather
than imposing a single one, we are curious to hear how many other views
emanate from the navreme symbol.
The green colour, however, stands for
“hope” in the Central European context. In the
Asian Feng-Shui Pagua, as a combination of green for
“family” and black for “career”
- green and black stand for “knowledge”.
back to top
|