Re: ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available #standards #strategy

Stephen Bounds

Hi Arthur,

While we are on the topic of "dialogue" ... I do want to understand why the committee didn't make a more concerted effort to promote the availability of the ISO 30401 draft standard once it was released.

Honestly, if it weren't for David Griffith's article criticising the standard -- which was nearly four weeks after public comments opened --
I wouldn't have known it was available at all. After the fact, I did find Ron Young's LinkedIn Post and a couple of other posts on the APM's UK site, but no obvious coordinated effort.

It's as much a question about the ISO committee process as anything else. Is there no requirement for ISO committees to have a formal stakeholder communications plan for when draft standards go out for public consultation?

-- Stephen.

Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
M: 0401 829 096

On 11/01/2018 5:07 PM, 'Arthur' [sikmleaders] wrote:

Thanks Bill,

Our role as leaders is to encourage inclusive and constructive dialogue in order to leverage existing knowledge and co-create new knowledge. When this is achieve through robust constructive conversations across the widest diversity of perspectives, we produce a higher quality (tangible) outputs and (intangible) outcomes.

The most valued role of argument is not in the winning and proving who is right and who is wrong - it is in the new insights that it highlights to co-create new insights that take us to a better set of options and a deeper understanding that we collectively had before. This is the synergistic power of /Conversations That Matter/ and /Creative Friction/.




*/Arthur Shelley/*

*Producer: **Creative Melbourne <>*

*Author:**KNOW/ledge/ SUCCESS/ion/ <>*//Sustained performance and capability growth through knowledge projects

*Earlier Books:*The Organizational Zoo (2007) & Being a Successful Knowledge Leader (2009)

*Principal:* <>

*Founder:*Organizational Zoo Ambassadors Network <>

*Mb.*+61 413 047 408 *Skype:* Arthur.Shelley *Twitter:* @Metaphorage

*LinkedIn: *

*Free behavioural profiles:* <>

*Blog:* <>

Creative-Melbourne-Banner_2018_Final_Smaller <>

*From:* []
*Sent:* Thursday, 11 January 2018 12:36 AM
*Subject:* RE: [sikmleaders] Re: ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available

Well said Arthur!




Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at <>

*From:* <> []
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 08:30
*To:* <>
*Subject:* RE: [sikmleaders] Re: ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available

Hi Boris, Patrick and Chris,

I am familiar with the team in Russia who facilitate the KAM workshops and assume this to be more of a “lost in translation” phrase than what was meant. That team operate an organisation with associated Ron Young’s organisation and facilitate a range of training programs leveraging Knowledge Associates IP and IP from other international sources (translated into Russian as all trainers there have Russian as native language and varying degrees of English as second or third language).

I have pointed out this inappropriate statement to them and asked for it to be changed. Clearly KAM methodology is NOT THE foundation of the ISO standard and KAI IP is not “embedded” into the standard. KAM is of course, like many strategic knowledge approaches, including some the approaches designed and shared by many knowledge professionals in this forum, aligned and supportive of elements mentioned in the standard (culture, Cop’s, environment, data management etc). Good knowledge management practices are mentioned because they add value in the standard, but are not linked back to any specific methodologies. This is why the move to principles based standards is effective as it describes what is good to include in an effective program, but does not prescribe how to go about achieving these principles. The method will be different for each organisation and the context in which they apply the standard (just as it is for other management Systems Standards, such as Quality and Environmental). Much of the wording  and elements of the standard is defined by the common definitions used across all of the Management Systems Standards (which includes the Asset Management Standard).

It is good that there is robust debate happening about the standard in several international forums. This debate, when constructively managed to highlight alternatives and improvements, will enhance the standard and this is the purpose of the public feedback process on the draft.

When the Australian Standard for KM was done back in 2005, there was heated debate WITHIN the committee about what should be included and what should be excluded. There was also debate on this standard in the actKM forum and also at the last 2 KM Australia conferences. I personally would prefer a completely open cocreative approach to standards development, but that is not the policy of Standards Australia, whose rules limit the number of people and the level of document circulation.

My way of thinking is we need to work with what we have to get a standard created to provide a greater level of credibility for Knowledge as a professional discipline and in doing so we can connect KMers into a more connected international community. This is something that we will all benefit from and no doubt as a more connected community we will collectively have more credibility with government and policy makers to increase awareness of the importance of knowledge in all forms of decision making at all levels.  Perhaps when we achieve this together, we the international  knowledge professionals, can claim our place as a management discipline alongside finance, marketing, sales, logistics and even project management. It is painful to admit that all these disciplines are more connected and more acknowledged to add value than the profession of knowledge! (which by our own preaching is all about collaboration, connections and sharing).

Until we start to constructively share the best principles and practices we ask others to demonstrate, we will never reach the potential that knowledge offers to all organisations everywhere.

Meanwhile, we just have to work within the rules built by recognised disciplines, to build our collective credibility and earn the right to represent a collective voice to change the rules to something better.


*/Arthur Shelley/*

*Producer: **Creative Melbourne* <>

*Author:**KNOW/ledge/ SUCCESS/ion/* <>//Sustained performance and capability growth through knowledge projects

*Earlier Books:*The Organizational Zoo (2007) & Being a Successful Knowledge Leader (2009)

*Principal:* <>

*Founder:*Organizational Zoo Ambassadors Network <>

*Mb.*+61 413 047 408 *Skype:* Arthur.Shelley *Twitter:* @Metaphorage

*LinkedIn: *****

*Free behavioural profiles:* <>

*Blog:* <>

Creative-Melbourne-Banner_2018_Final_Smaller <>

*From:* <> []
*Sent:* Wednesday, 10 January 2018 9:19 PM
*To:* <>
*Subject:* Re: [sikmleaders] Re: ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available

I agree this is of great concern. I have written as below to the Secretary of the BSI KMS/1 Committee. If you have registered on the BSI website and are logged in, then you are also able to submit a message to the Committee via this page:

I don’t have an email address, I’m afraid.


Dear Secretary

My attention has been drawn to the following webpage advertising a September masterclass in Russia taught by a Knowledge Associates member, apparently claiming that the ISO 30401 Knowledge Management standard currently in public consultation stage has as its basis the proprietary Knowledge Assets Management (KAM) methodology.

The use of methods oriented towards the management of knowledge assets (stocks, resources, flows) is well supported in the literature and practice of knowledge management. However this looks like a commercial claim by a business associate of the current Chair of the BSI KM Standards Committee Mr Ron Young, CEO of Knowledge Associates, for his firm's specific proprietary methodology as the basis for the standard. I am sure this claim is not true in fact, but it raises the question of a conflict of interest in adjudicating public feedback relating to the management of knowledge assets. In the interests of preserving public and professional confidence in the standards process, I believe Ron Young should recuse himself from the Committee for the purposes of reviewing and responding to public feedback on the draft standard.

CC: Mr Ron Young by email <>

Patrick Lambe


Patrick Lambe


+65 62210383


website: <>

weblog: <>

twitter: @plambesg

Knowledge mapping made easy: <>

On 10 Jan 2018, at 1:15 AM, Chris Collison <>
[sikmleaders] <
<>> wrote:

Looks like you might have found a smoking gun there Boris - (even
if it has gone 18 months too early…)

It’s disappointing.  IMHO, this kind of claim devalues the
well-intentioned work of others who have worked on the standard.
There are comments on the draft pointing out the Knowledge Asset
Management is a proprietary approach, and I’m optimistic that the
final document will be completely methodologically agnostic – but
please add your comments to the document too.

Naturally consultants will want to develop client propositions
which refer to the standard, but this feels presumptuous and
premature to say the least!



<>> on behalf of "'Boris Jaeger' <>[sikmleaders]"
< <>>
<>" <
*Date:*Tuesday, 9 January 2018 at 20:11
<>" <
*Subject:*[sikmleaders] Re: ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available

Hi Chris, all,

your assumption "hijacked as a consultants’ charter with a fair
degree of product placement..." may be more than true.


"...Familiarization with the basics of the methodology of
Knowledge Assets Management (the basis of ISO 30401: 2017
Knowledge Management)..."

(Excerpt from KA Int'l masterclass description 9/2017,
translate: <>)

No matter if this statement is true or not, this is not funny
anymore.... Pls stop this!!!


Boris Jaeger - "Curiosity is the beginning of all learning!"

jaegerWM - Boris Jaeger
Albert-Stehlin Str. 6
79365 Rheinhausen
fon: +49-(0)7643-913880
mobile: +49-(0)1577-7544883
----- <> <>
<> <>

•KM Thought Leader
•Top 100
Influencer (2013/15)
•KM Multiplier
•KM Expert Team Member
•KM Community Leader
•#1 KM Blogger
•TLO Reviewer of the Year

Join to automatically receive all group messages.