Doug wrote:
>>>But, what about aptitude (aka skills and competencies) vs. attitude (motivation, persistence, passion, etc. etc.).<<<
Both are aspects of tacit knowledge - the embodied knowledge contained in a worker's head. It is local and sticky - hard or impossible to codify, not readily transferable (ever try to transfer an attitude??), yet often the greatest source of value creation in knowledge-based work.
At the highest, most abstract level, I think of tacit knowledge (comprising aptitudes, skills,abilities, talent, attitudes, etc), as one of the four knowledge-based resources of the firm. It, along with others include:
- tacit knowledge
- social capital
- documents, information, IP, "stuff"
- infrastructure (work processes, IT, office sites, etc).
The goal of KM, then, is to maximize the value add of the firm's knowledge-based resources. The way to measure the success of any efforts aimed at doing so is by measuring value through innovation (products as well as processes) and value through productivity improvement/OpEx reduction.
I have yet to see any of the scores of KM activities and tools that do not fit into the above description. There are scores of of types of legitimate KM activities and interventions, and whole consulting firms have been built on their prowess in only one or two of them.
This framework is one I have used for educating clients for whom KM is a new construct; and they are likely not even sure where to get started, or what the benefits would be (in other words, probably none of the folks in this forum!).
I have also used it as a diagnostic framework, to figure out where the highest/best application of KM might be, how it might add value (i.e., which of the scores of possible KM tools/interventions/approaches to explore), and what type and amount of value is possible.
