We speak naturally about product development. We also speak about capability development, although in practice organizations often use terms such as capability improvement, capability maturity or organizational change.
While developing the body of knowledge based on the Practice Notes in this blog, I noticed that exactly the same pattern appeared again: the body of knowledge was not simply being documented. It was evolving.
New observations were captured. Existing concepts were refined. Connections emerged between previously unrelated ideas. Publications became richer through successive Knowledge Snapshots. Although the subject had changed, the nature of the work felt remarkably familiar.
This raised a question:
Are product development, capability development and the development of a body of knowledge fundamentally different activities, or are they different expressions of the same underlying pattern?
The terminology suggests they are different. Product development is associated with creating new products. Capability development is often associated with improving organizational abilities. Developing a body of knowledge appears to be something else again.
Yet each involves the same essential activity. An intended future state is envisioned. The current realization is understood. Intentional changes are made. The result is assessed. Learning from that assessment guides further evolution.
The subject changes, yet the pattern remains remarkably consistent.
This suggests that development should not be understood primarily as the creation of something new.
Rather:
Development is the intentional evolution of a subject toward its intended state.
Development encompasses every intentional effort to establish, improve, adapt, extend or modernize a subject.
For example:
Product development includes creating new products, extending existing products and modernizing mature products.
Capability development includes establishing new organizational capabilities, improving existing ones and adapting them to changing circumstances.
Development of a body of knowledge includes capturing observations, refining concepts, incorporating experience and periodically publishing new versions of derived documents.
Each represents the same underlying activity viewed through a different domain.
Regardless of the subject, development follows a similar lifecycle:
Intent → Reference Model → Development → Realization → Assessment → Learning
The intended state provides direction. A reference model makes that intended state explicit. Development changes the realization in the direction defined by the reference model. Assessment evaluates the current realization against the intended state. Learning then influences future development.
Importantly, learning may affect two different things. It may reveal that the realization should improve while the intended state remains valid. Or it may show that assumptions embodied in the reference model itself should be reconsidered.
Sustainable development therefore requires openness to improving both the realization and the model that guides it.
Viewing development in this way broadens its meaning considerably. Products, capabilities and bodies of knowledge are all examples of intentional subjects.
Each has:
- an intended state;
- a current realization;
- evidence that can be assessed;
- opportunities for learning;
- the ability to evolve over time.
The same conceptual pattern therefore applies regardless of the specific subject under consideration.
This does not eliminate the differences between domains. Product development, capability development and knowledge development each have their own practices, techniques and terminology.
What they share is a common developmental structure. This perspective provides a common conceptual foundation for the remainder of this framework:
- Reference models represent intended states.
- Development represents intentional movement toward those states.
- Assessment interprets evidence about the current realization.
- Learning improves the realization and may, where appropriate, revise the reference model itself.
The governance model proposed for maintaining a living body of knowledge is therefore not separate from the framework. It is one example of the broader development pattern.
This framework is developed using the same principles that it proposes for developing products, capabilities and other intentional subjects. In that sense, the framework serves as both theory and demonstration.
Development is often understood as creating something new.
A broader perspective is possible:
Development is the intentional evolution of a subject toward its intended state.
Whether the subject is a product, an organizational capability or a living body of knowledge, the same fundamental pattern emerges.
The subject changes.
The developmental structure remains.
Recognizing this common structure provides a foundation for understanding how reference models, assessment, learning and continuous improvement relate to one another across different domains.
Leave a Reply