I am somewhat challenged with my thoughts regarding the viability of continuously attempting to pushing something mainstream that has and continues to struggle for a wholesale adoption.
Mind mapping as a single radiant process has failed miserably to become a mainstream method globally. 40 years after the formalization by Mr Tony Buzan, and here we are still trying to justify its use and infusion into the mainstream.
Many of our colleagues are even confused as to the designations and distinct differences between Mind-Visual and Knowledge mapping.
Visual Mapping on the other hand is more descriptive of the multiple formats available for graphical expressiveness of information.
Knowledge mapping/management seems to be the future key with connectivity to back end data bases; namely relational databases. Some are using tools such as Mind mapping and flow charts as rather good front end applications in the vein of dash boards and master map configurations.
I would suggest that we are more effectively positioned as Information Managers and facilitators, who understand the value of Whole Brain information management.
The Mind mapping arena, whilst an excellent format for initial exposure to more effective Information management processing has failed to capture the generations proceeding the initial formalization of hand drawn Buzan Mapping 40 years ago.
It is rather amazing yet embarrassing to view the landscape and see some claiming Mind mapping to be the great panacea for the ills of current information management practices.
I firmly believe we should debate an approach for this portion of this century; as we shall be passing on this initiative to future generations for further development and improvement.
The potential strategy may be one of a focus on information management rather than a focus on the tools. The methods are important; yet the application of the mindset is IMO most important. Very few of our colleagues actually speak of the association with a mindset.
I firmly believe the Body of Knowledge proposal made some years ago by Arjen Ter Hoeve and Wallace Tait was and remains to be an initiative that would solidify, verify and validate our purpose, Mission and Business model. At this time Pascal Venier and Wallace Tait are pro-actively seeking to prove the viability of such a venture; using current academic and business management system standards as benchmarks for establishment.