A taste of wisdom
Now, I realize that such a broad and deep scope does not mean that I have the right to write articles that are steeped in academia, or to write in an inaccessible language that uses "jargon to define jargon" (a fractal in its own right). In fact, I go to great lengths to eke out and replace the jargon with less specialized words that convey the same essence. But sometimes, just replacing a word would require a paper much longer that the article itself, and this is part of the circularity of the knowledge lattice that facilitates the onion layers of incremental learning--a progression of semantic convergence through experiential knowledge assimilation.

I know how frustrated I used to get when I'd open a book and not be able to get past the first chapter because of all the jargon. But once I learned to get over it, I discovered that by opening my mind to the possibilities I could walk among the deep words and get great value without falling into the abyss. I discovered that some of the words stick and some don't, and that's OK. This enlightenment, of course, ended up being my big learning.

Once I absorbed the context surrounding the words, I found that I could walk into the deeper internal meaning embedded in these special words that act, effectively, as focused signposts for deeper knowledge and thereby deeper learning experiences. For when you learn the truer deeper meaning of a word within its targeted context, as well as across the context of its many associated usages, you gain deep powerful polymorphic knowledge. And perhaps even a taste of wisdom.

I believe most good papers should be read time and time again, not just once, so that you can peel off a little more contextual knowledge in layers each time you read them. These layers should provide both depth and scope of further interpretation that you can interpret for your own context, and for other subsequent contexts, through the concept of knowledge reusability, in true incremental fashion, so that it becomes a never ending learning experience. This is a key deliverable of the Knowledge Management Movement.

A delicate balance
But alas, this is the way I try to write--balancing readability with conceptual stretch--crafting each word and phrase so that readers can peel layers of isometric conceptualizations from isomorphic knowledge space. I do realize that making readers work a little harder is a double-edged sword, particularly when their reading becomes an unfinished work. However, I also try to layer it so that those who want to can get a heaping helping of knowledge not just the first time through, but each time through. After all, the pursuit of knowledge should be a never-ending horizon.

I am reminded of one of my clients who worked for the Department of Environmental Protection in the U.S. Federal Government. One time, when I wrote one of my all-too-frequent 30-page White Papers on the conceptual design and theoretical underpinnings of Knowledge Management--most of which I have already implemented in a practical software product called KOS (Knowledge Object Suite)--Jim told himself that this time he was going to focus hard and understand this paper the first time through. So he diligently read it with great focus, pushing through the depths of the conceptual realms as he uncovered them, burning in a deep understanding as he plowed through, aided by many of my previous papers and the numerous discussions we'd had in past meetings.