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


Murray Jennex
 

I have a model of KM success (its been statistically validated and published) that I have revised.  A couple of points from this.  I don't like the idea of knowledge as an asset, it suggests knowledge can be codified and stored and tends to leave out the real source of the knowledge, the knower.  What I find most fascinating about this is that it based on Resource View of the Organization as opposed to the Knowledge View of the Organization.  Any reason for this?  I suppose its because it is easier to look at knowledge as a thing as it makes it easier to manage and count but in reality its not a very effective view on knowledge.  I do have three components that relate to the below in my model.  The first is knowledge strategy, this is what the organization creates to guide it in obtaining the knowledge it needs to compete.  The second is KM governance (similar to knowledge policy).  This is the group who ensures the KM program is achieving its desired goals.  The third is the Knowledge Content Process which guides the organization in how to capture, store, and search/retrieve knowledge and includes actual knowledge nuggets as well as linkages to knowers.  There are of course more but these three fit the below concepts of KM asset strategy and knowledge policy.  As the use of KMS, I think this is a fine term when understood that the KMS is whatever is being used to support knowledge use.  Again, these aren't just ideas, they are part of a validated model....murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Collison chris.collison@... [sikmleaders]
To: sikmleaders Sent: Wed, Jan 3, 2018 3:26 pm
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available



My product placement antennae had actually bristled a bit at the mention of a ‘Knowledge Management Asset Strategy”, and the suggestion that the organisation must have a “Knowledge Policy”.
 
Good challenge/Devil’s advocacy!  I was never a fan of the label or the concept of a knowledge management (management) system.  To me, KM isn’t quite enough like Quality management or Safety Management to merit the same treatment.
 
I’m also uncomfortable with the ‘separatist’ approach that is implied by a discretely measurable management system for KM. I’ve always been more integrationist in my approach, dipping into other disciplines and not worried about controlling the borders or building walls.  Some of the language and positioning in the BSI document struck me as a bit Trump/Brexitesque..  (OK, so now I’ve offended everyone!)
 
I think the subtlety of it being a KMS Standard will quickly be lost though, and this would become known as the KM Standard, and KM then becomes perceived (and packaged and sold) as a recipe rather than a set of ingredients.
 
…and I’d to be known as a chef rather than a fast-food vendor.
 
Cheers,
Chris
 
 
From: <sikmleaders@...> on behalf of "Stephen Bounds km@... [sikmleaders]" <sikmleaders@...>
Reply-To: "sikmleaders@..." <sikmleaders@...>
Date: Wednesday, 3 January 2018 at 22:57
To: "sikmleaders@..." <sikmleaders@...>
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available
 
 
To reply to my own email ... I realised that you may be referring to the presumption of "audit-to-consult" as product placement. You then write:
Sometimes [KM is] a stealth operation, sometimes a partnership, sometimes a slipstream, sometimes a viral experiment. The standard needs to reflect this, rather than foreshadow an audit-to-consult process.
To play devil's advocate, can any of these reasonably be called a "knowledge management system" (as distinct from being knowledge management)?
The idea of a KMS is the scope of the standard, after all. What you describe are not really systems in their own right, but rather ninja interventions to an existing system.
Cheers,
-- Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 4/01/2018 9:47 AM, Chris Collison chris.collison@... [sikmleaders] wrote:
 
Hi Stephen,
The BSI version reads like is started out with good intentions as a non-prescriptive, flexible framework to prompt thought - but somehow became hijacked as a consultants’ charter with a fair degree of product placement, and subconsciously enshrining ‘our approach’ conveniently in a standard. 
I do believe that people invested their time with good intent, and I’m aware that not having been involved in the meetings makes me something of an armchair critic.
I’ve made 40 comments since it was published - it’s a laborious process, but it’s important that we engage.
 
Overall it takes a standpoint that KM has to exist as a managed programme with policies, roles and measures.  130 clients on, my experience is that KM is a set is possible responses to the state of an organisation, applied thoughtfully and contextually and in conjunction with a much wider range of interventions and functions. Sometimes it’s a stealth operation, sometimes a partnership, sometimes a slipstream, sometimes a viral experiment. The standard needs to reflect this, rather than foreshadow an audit-to-consult process.
 
My view is that it needs to be wound back to something much more generic, simpler, less prescriptive, and purged of any vested interests.  Then it could genuinely be a helpful business prompt which serves the many rather than the few.
Chris
 
 
 
From: on behalf of "Stephen Bounds km@... [sikmleaders]"
Reply-To: "sikmleaders@..."
Date: Wednesday, 3 January 2018 at 22:31
To: ActKM Discussion List , KM for Development , "sikmleaders@..."
Subject: [sikmleaders] ISO 30401 - KM standard draft available
 
 
Hi everyone,
A reminder that the draft standard for knowledge management systems (ISO 30401) now has a public draft available for comment.
From the website:
BS ISO 30401 Knowledge management systems -- Requirements
Source:
ISO
Committee:
HCS/1 - Human Capital
Categories:
Management. Human resources
Comment period start date:
23/11/2017
Comment period end date:
16/01/2018

Scope

This international standard sets requirements and provide guidelines for establishing, implementing, maintaining, reviewing and improving an effective management system for knowledge management in organizations. All the requirements of this international standard are applicable to any organization, regardless of its type or size, or the products and services it provides.
You can read the draft and make official comments by registering on the BSI site with a free login.
Who has had a chance to read the draft KM standard? Any thoughts?
Regards,
-- Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
 


Join main@SIKM.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.