John Armstrong on Knowledge Transfer

[ The University of Melbourne Voice Vol. 1, No. 11  6 - 20 August 2007 ]

Intellectually ambitious universities should see Knowledge Transfer as a central concern.

Internationally-acclaimed author and influential public speaker in the realm of art and philosophy, Associate Professor John Armstrong, was appointed recently as the University of Melbourne’s inaugural Knowledge Transfer Fellow.

The University seeks to embed the concept of Knowledge Transfer, one of the three core strands of the Growing Esteem Strategy, within the University’s operations as well as its teaching and research curricula, and to establish Melbourne as an acknowledged leader in this increasingly crucial area.

Associate Professor Armstrong brings acute understanding of both the practice and scholarship of Knowledge Transfer, gleaned through his books on art and aesthetics, including Conditions of Love, The Secret Power of Beauty and Love, Life, Goethe (all published by Penguin Press).

He is also a regular expert commentator on radio and contributor to major international newspapers and journals, and has conducted globally recognised lectures at forums as diverse as the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, London’s National Gallery and Writers’ Festivals in Melbourne and Sydney.

Associate Professor Armstrong speaks here with Andrew Ramsey, Knowledge Transfer Communica-tions Officer for the office of the University’s Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Innovation and Development).

Q How do you describe Knowledge Transfer?

A Knowledge Transfer draws attention to two major strands of intellectual ambition. Firstly, that ideas should become real in the world. Plato, for example, wanted to change people’s lives; he wanted to guide the conduct of societies. He didn’t want his thoughts to live only within the pages of a book.

Secondly: curiosity about people’s needs. My area is Philosophy of Art, and I’ve found it very helpful to think about boredom in art galleries. I’m often bored in galleries – though I feel I shouldn’t be. So I’ve tried to connect my research to this problem.

We tend to associate Knowledge Transfer with applied science, but it’s also deeply relevant to the humanities.

Q Transferring knowledge is what universities have always done. Why does it need to be formally identified now?

A Universities have often willed the end but not the means. I think a lot about a very distinguished professor in the United Kingdom who used to complain bitterly about the impoverishment of public culture. His own work was, in principle, superbly relevant but almost impossible to understand.

After 15 attempts you could begin to get the hang of it. He was completely successful in his professional career, but unsuccessful in what he really wanted. Identifying Knowledge Transfer is a way of willing the means. It doesn’t alter the true intellectual ambition; it aims at fulfilling that ambition.

Q Is the importance placed on Knowledge Transfer a reaction to, or a reflection of, ongoing changes in the academic world?

A Knowledge Transfer is the name of a central concern that an intellectually ambitious university should have. The attention that we’re giving it is logical. I think we’re in a phase in which responsibility is a key concern.

In the Humanities you see that in the gradual demise of irony and ­theory. Knowledge Transfer expresses the ambitions of being understood and of making a difference in reality.

Q How do you view suggestions that it is just the latest bureaucratic buzz word?

A With sympathy. Buzz words are annoying because people bandy them about too readily without saying what they really mean. But that doesn’t mean that there is nothing important at stake. It’s not the phrase that matters, it’s what the phrase refers to that counts.

Q How will the recognition of Knowledge Transfer benefit the University of Melbourne?

A A university stands in a reciprocal relationship to society. How much good will does our society have towards the university sector as a whole, and to the University of Melbourne in particular?

Governments tend to reflect broad public sentiment in this respect. Research doesn’t only need to be done. It needs to be seen to be done; and it needs to be seen to be important in people’s lives. That’s crucial to good relations with the state, and crucial to developing autonomy. You can’t force people to take you seriously. If we’re ignored or left to drift – that’s our problem. We have to do something about it. Knowledge Transfer is the name for doing something about it.

Q Is Knowledge Transfer more than an add-on to existing research, teaching and learning?

A It has the potential to enrich research and teaching. It takes us to St Augustine’s famous question: why is this knowledge good? Ultimately, that’s what we’re trying to answer.

Q Is it important to acknowledge that it’s a two-way process, with ideas flowing to as well as from the University?

A It’s essential. Quite often this is an informal process: in a bar or at a party. It can be delicate because the people we need to learn from don’t always possess their knowledge in a well-structured, articulate form. There’s a need for imagination here.