Magdelena discusses some interesting ideas in PKM and "cues to knowledge." The idea of "cues" suggests that all the information we put together is merely a mental cue to help people understand what it is we are trying to communicate. As many people have said, one cannot write knowledge, at least in the sense of knowledge-in-action. In this light, the more cues I can provide the eventual "user" of my bit of information, the more likely someone new will be able to make sense of the The more context I can add to a document or email or voice mail, the more likely the recipients will be able to decipher and translate into something of import for them.
If I am writing notes for myself, I can use my own language and abbreviations. (She mentions the catch that if I am writing for my "future self," I need to be careful to use language or notes that will still make sense in a couple years.) As my audience gets larger and the time factor gets longer, I need to be more careful about the words and language I use, so that I can best connect to those expected readers. In an organization, where I know very few of the potential recipients of my cues, I have to put a lot of effort into writing well and providing enough context. I wonder if this is some explanation as to why people don't participate in corporate KM projects?
Magdelena draws this idea in a nice graphic that attempts to draw a continuum from personal KM to organizational KM. And be sure to have a look at the comments, where there are some additional interesting thoughts.