Many of my discussions with customers about knowledge management (KM) initially focus on how to capture knowledge as it is created or flows through an organization. Users want to know how to convince employees to share their experiences or take the time to document best practices or other insights. They ask about the best systems to store, classify, search and distribute this information. All of that is important, but often misplaced, I find. It's generally far more useful to concentrate on how the organization will use knowledge rather than just how to collect it. Ironically, emphasizing how knowledge will be used usually ends up increasing the quality and amount of information collected as well.

One of the reasons many people are hesitant to spend the time to document what they know is because they don't know how, or even if, it will be used. Too many KM initiatives gather great material, which then sits unaccessed on a virtual shelf in some repository somewhere. Focusing exclusively on how to capture knowledge means not building knowledge access into daily business processes, training users how to find information that can help them make better decisions faster, publicizing how the use of someone's insights has led to success or other steps that would encourage knowledge use.

Visibility into how captured knowledge will be used can be a tremendous incentive to participate in knowledge capture efforts. Subject matter experts are more likely to participate if they know that their efforts will actually be used. Individual recognition can often be the best incentive, in fact; far better than the clumsy efforts to financially reward contributors that I have seen. It is a cliché (but nonetheless true) to say that nothing succeeds like success. Ringing the bell to highlight wins and successes, with recognition for the user and contributor, can multiply this value.

Of course, exclusively focusing on how knowledge is used would lead to a chicken-and-egg paradox: How can we use knowledge if we haven't captured any? Often, this presents an excuse to dive into technology. Many KM planners, especially those from IT departments, are more comfortable dealing with the technology-driven issues of how to capture, catalogue and store information in repositories than the people-driven issues of how it gets used throughout the organization. As with so many high-performance workplace concepts, finding the correct balance is important. A good rule of thumb is to focus at least as much attention on using knowledge as capturing it. This would go a long way toward swinging the balance the right way.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Good start, but there is another layer that must be considered. In addition to thinking about how the information is used, you need to think about how it is consumed. This is a subtle but important difference. Don’t just think about consuming the information from standard end user applications or tools. Think about delivering information using Web 2 techniques (e.g., RSS feeds) so that it can be incorporated into mashups. This ensures you have an open access model that encourages unanticipated uses of the information that can add value to individuals or communities.

Your point (and Dave’s) are right on. But we have to go further than looking at how “knowledge” will be consumed. We have to create an environment where management sets the example (or is otherwise engaged – not just writing checks) and where management goes out of its way to identify, recognize and publicly reward people for writing down and sharing their stuff. Management needs to see the real business value in systematically reusing information - and reward people accordingly. Rewards, of course, need not be monetary. Many times, public recognition is good enough. In addition, it’s not just collection that’s important. For example, making shared best practice information broadly accessible helps bring people into contact with some of the personal benefits of working in a more open environment. Culture, rewards, social and operating environment, management engagement – and the sociology of the organization – all contribute to success or failure of these efforts and these “soft factors” are far more important than the related technology decisions.

The only thing I would add is that users should be rewarded for USING the collected knowledge as well as for contributing it. People who are effective at educating themselves quickly or can find the right best practices to help them have tremendous value to the enterprise.

There is another dimension to this that must be understood before any progress will ever be made. The collective term 'knowledge' is a red herring. Managing knowledge is like defining love - not possible on the grand scale, only possible at a personal level and even then the definition will be abstract rather than absolute. When this dimension is understood then sub-classification techniques will change. They will incorporate the consumption activity but it will be possible to measure the value of the 'knowledge' consumed against the purpose much more effectively. Once value can be established the concept of knowledge management will have a stronger business case and a greater level of application can be derived.

To add to Elliot's comment: "the definition will be abstract rather than absolute," I would throw in the chestnut I learned in my Trainer class. The ultimate goal of training (or knowledge) is to improve behavior. This ties into the starting point of this discussion, which is how to "use the knowledge." In other words, what behavior is the knowledge going to change?

Jeffry, Nice Thoughts. I agree with all the responses. Here are my thoughts.

KM Life-Cycle:

Note: There can be NO MISSING OR WEAK links.

Define the Goal -> Organizational ->> Group ->> Projects (Function) ->> Tasks ->> Skills Requirement ->> Knowledge Plan ->> Experts ->> Easy Contribution ->> Share ->> Learners (Individual Goals & Skills) ->> Learn ->> Interact ->> Apply ->> Feel ->> Prove ->> Become Experts ->> Measure ->> Get Recognition & Rewards

There are some more dots that need to be connected as well. Sorry to represent my knowledge this way. Otherwise, my response will be too long if I need to focus on the big picture. Am sure you can get the message.

So simple technology is not the answer. But energized people powered by system thinking and best practices enabled by sophisticated system (knowledge platform) using a scalable and consistent model is vital to succeed in KM.

Awesome! Let me add to the dot...

Define the Goal -> Organizational ->> Group ->> Projects (Function) ->> Tasks ->> (->> Understanding own roles) ->> Skills Requirement ->> Knowledge Plan/chart ->> Experts ->> (->> Develop best practices) ->> Easy Contribution ->> Share ->> Learners (Individual Goals & Skills) ->> Learn ->> Interact ->> Apply ->> Feel ->> Prove ->> Become Experts ->> Measure ->> Get Recognition & Rewards