Date   

Re: KM and legal concerns #question

Bill Dixon
 

Implementing a formal KM strategy is also an opportunity to reinforce records retention rules/practices.  This is a great opportunity - not necessarily an impediment to instilling KM practices.  

Accounting firms are also concerned about records discovery and the big 4 have been involved in KM forever.

BD 


On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:09 AM, <andregalitsky@...> wrote:

 

Some of my potential clients have expressed reservations about implementing a KM system due to legal concerns.  They want to capture and organize knowledge within their organization, but they don't want to capture things that would create legal problems in case of litigation.   There is a concern that some KM artifacts could be uncovered during discovery and used as evidence.  Even if the evidence is non-consequential, it would still create more work for the in-house legal team.


I was just wondering how you may have dealt with this concern in your prior engagements.   Thank you.


Andre


Re: KM and legal concerns #question

Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
 

Andre -

 

KM has absolutely nothing to do with the legal requirements of discovery.   As soon as anyone makes a note, writes something down, or enters it into their computer, it becomes explicit.  It exists and is subject to discovery.  Even we have to submit original classified or designated content in response to an Access to Information request and indicate the level of clearance required for the person handling the document and the legal reason for redacting (very specific) elements.  In the private sector, people have gone to jail for destroying personal files after a discovery notice was issued.  The only way to limit legal liability is to not write anything down (somewhat impractical) or have legally defendable information management policies in place ( and followed) that call for disposal of content (including e-mails) after relatively short retention periods.  Security is the antithesis of knowledge sharing but in defence, financial, or legal organizations, it trumps knowledge management every time.

 

This is conceptually the same problem that we have at Defence Research & Development Canada.  Our research ranges from open to highly classified.  And we are subject to legally binding access to information requests.  The not inconsequential challenge is to balance security requirements with openness and sharing.

 

Physically, we use three air-gapped servers for classified, internal, and open documents.  Access to each is controlled at an appropriate level.  Within each server, we also control access to individual sites according their sensitivity.  Then, each document is also classified or designated according to its content.  Designated or higher documents only have their title listed; access requires contacting the author or owner.  Finally, our (somewhat complicated) document template includes provisions for designating or classifying individual pages or paragraphs.  Of course a page and document are classified according to the highest designation of any part thereof.  This is useful for Access to Information Requests in that it enables us to redact individual bits of a document based on various legal exceptions without having to review every document.  It is also useful for document requests in that it enables us to determine whether the requestor is authorized to see the document. 

 

Knowledge management is a lot like science.  It should not interact with the law.

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of andregalitsky@...
Sent: January-17-14 10:10 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KM and legal concerns

 

 

Some of my potential clients have expressed reservations about implementing a KM system due to legal concerns.  They want to capture and organize knowledge within their organization, but they don't want to capture things that would create legal problems in case of litigation.   There is a concern that some KM artifacts could be uncovered during discovery and used as evidence.  Even if the evidence is non-consequential, it would still create more work for the in-house legal team.

 

I was just wondering how you may have dealt with this concern in your prior engagements.   Thank you.

 

Andre


KM and legal concerns #question

andregalitsky@...
 

Some of my potential clients have expressed reservations about implementing a KM system due to legal concerns.  They want to capture and organize knowledge within their organization, but they don't want to capture things that would create legal problems in case of litigation.   There is a concern that some KM artifacts could be uncovered during discovery and used as evidence.  Even if the evidence is non-consequential, it would still create more work for the in-house legal team.


I was just wondering how you may have dealt with this concern in your prior engagements.   Thank you.


Andre


Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Thomas Blumer
 

Dear Jim,
 
Thank you for the clarification. I agree with you that such a research blunder in a peer-reviewed journal is a kind of shocking. I have not noticed the inappropriate APQC rating/comments in the meta-analysis I've sent out till you mention it. Believe me, it was not my intention to put the APQC model in a bad light. I think the model is actually pretty good and Cara was one of the person who inspired me to become more involved with KM in the first place. In addition, the KM Institute ranked the APQC model as a well balanced methodology, the initial model was maybe too focused on best practices and left out areas like new knowledge creation. To my knowledge, the new model addresses these areas now, is that correct?
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer
 
 
 
 


On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Lee, Jim <jlee@...> wrote:
 

As a provider of maturity models, I have intentionally only lurked in this thread instead of mentioning APQC’s Levels of KM Maturity for concerns of appearing to “sell” our model in lieu of simply sharing knowledge. However, gross mis-statements about our model leads me to respond. In the paper cited, http://www.tlainc.com/articl263.htm the authors state the following deficiencies in Table 1, item 2 (APQC’s model) as:

 

No Key Areas.

No Assessment methodology.

No validation.

No Extended organizational maturity

 

Each of those observations and assertions are unequivocally in error, and show a severe lack of understanding regarding our model and process for validation. Each of the listed areas are in fact addressed by our model and methodology. While I suspect that no harm has come of listing our model in this journal article, setting the record straight is the intent of my post.

 

In fact, I suspect that the authors’ only information about our model comes from reading a brief whitepaper since they indicate our authors as Hubert and Lemons (authors of the whitepaper only). In fact, our model was developed with the expertise of six leading firms from around the world, our own KM thought leader Dr. Carla O’Dell, and even co-developer of the original SEI CMMI maturity model, Dr. Bill Curtis in a thorough, months long development collaborative study. It is they who should be credited with authorship.

 

As a former academician myself, I understand the use of “surveys” of existing models to be useful during the literature search, but this lack of understanding leaves me wondering about the quality of the research in general. For that reason, I would encourage anyone interested in using any of the models cited to do their own due diligence.

 

To date, we’ve conducted more than 170 assessments—and validations—and are confident that it fulfills the needs of our users as many have used the results to inform their KM strategies and activities. To the participants of this forum, I apologize for this lengthy rant, but when a peer-reviewed journal publishes factual errors, I believe it is owed a correction to advance the state of research.

----------------------------------

Jim Lee

KM Senior Advisor, APQC

+1-713-685-4764 – vmail (office)

+1-216-338-3548 – mobile (direct)

jlee@...

www.apqc.org

Make Best Practices Your PracticesSM

 



Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Lee, Jim <jlee@...>
 

As a provider of maturity models, I have intentionally only lurked in this thread instead of mentioning APQC’s Levels of KM Maturity for concerns of appearing to “sell” our model in lieu of simply sharing knowledge. However, gross mis-statements about our model leads me to respond. In the paper cited, http://www.tlainc.com/articl263.htm the authors state the following deficiencies in Table 1, item 2 (APQC’s model) as:

 

No Key Areas.

No Assessment methodology.

No validation.

No Extended organizational maturity

 

Each of those observations and assertions are unequivocally in error, and show a severe lack of understanding regarding our model and process for validation. Each of the listed areas are in fact addressed by our model and methodology. While I suspect that no harm has come of listing our model in this journal article, setting the record straight is the intent of my post.

 

In fact, I suspect that the authors’ only information about our model comes from reading a brief whitepaper since they indicate our authors as Hubert and Lemons (authors of the whitepaper only). In fact, our model was developed with the expertise of six leading firms from around the world, our own KM thought leader Dr. Carla O’Dell, and even co-developer of the original SEI CMMI maturity model, Dr. Bill Curtis in a thorough, months long development collaborative study. It is they who should be credited with authorship.

 

As a former academician myself, I understand the use of “surveys” of existing models to be useful during the literature search, but this lack of understanding leaves me wondering about the quality of the research in general. For that reason, I would encourage anyone interested in using any of the models cited to do their own due diligence.

 

To date, we’ve conducted more than 170 assessments—and validations—and are confident that it fulfills the needs of our users as many have used the results to inform their KM strategies and activities. To the participants of this forum, I apologize for this lengthy rant, but when a peer-reviewed journal publishes factual errors, I believe it is owed a correction to advance the state of research.

----------------------------------

Jim Lee

KM Senior Advisor, APQC

+1-713-685-4764 – vmail (office)

+1-216-338-3548 – mobile (direct)

jlee@...

www.apqc.org

Make Best Practices Your PracticesSM

 


Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Thomas Blumer
 

Hi Al,
 
Now, I have plenty of material to experiment with, thank you!
 
BTW: I found an interesting Knowledge Management Maturity comparison article in the Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2011:
 
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer
 
 


On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...> wrote:
 

Thanks Thomas.  Anyone who admits to liking my stuff gets more!

 

There are lots of possible measures.  All of these can be absolute measures, percentages, relative to a baseline, or compared with best practices (e.g., APQC).  The following is not exhaustive – just off the top of my head.

 

Creation: See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/innovation-architecture

·         Publications, reports, presentations (research outputs)

·         Successful experiments, discoveries, new understanding (project success)

·         Lessons learned, management recommendations (organizational learning)

·         Innovations, prototypes, patents (products/services developed)  

 

Knowledge Management: See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/ksen-paradigm-shift-18-opt

·         Repositories in place, documents stored, successful searches (managing assets)

·         Views, Downloads, conversations, interactions (knowledge sharing)

·         Active Communities, social networks, outputs harvested (collaboration)

 

Preservation: (See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/cbc-capturing-knowledge-15

·         Expertise elicited, knowledge captured (continuously)

·         Legacy content available and searchable (future usefulness)

·         Job Blog in place (how knowledge work is actually done)

 

Use: See: http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/pubwarehouse/pdfs/27338.pdf

·         Distribution, accesses, views, downloads (passive knowledge transfer)

·         User interactions: explanations, consultations, demonstrations (active knowledge transfer)

·         Relevance, usability, timeliness (utility attributes)

·         User interactions: promotion, support, intervention (implementation support)

·         Implementation, application, use (the holy grail outcome!)

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-14-14 5:57 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hi Al,

 

Thank you for sharing your framework. I particularly liked Figure 3: "Defense R&D Canada as a system"

 

 

 

From a professional Services perspective, does anyone has good KPIs for such a model? Things I could think of that are important, but maybe not the best metrics because they focus on activity instead of outcome are:

 

Create:

-Training days

-Certifications acquired

 

Manage:

-Issues solved in forums

 

Use:

-Implementation days without escalation to R&D

-Number of escalations that happened too late

-Number of escalations that could have been avoided with proper training

 

Lost Knowledge:

-Turnover

-Retirements

 

Please let me know what worked for you well in the past. I still wonder if our VP of Support and the VP of Services actually agree to capture some of these metrics as they may reveal fundamental knowledge gaps.

 

Thanks,

 

Thomas

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...> wrote:

 

Thomas – See the following for a paper on Knowledge Services best practices. 

http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc121/p536618_A1b.pdf

 

I am currently working on an architecture to implement the framework.

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-13-14 2:40 PM
To: sikmleaders@...


Subject: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hello,

 

We are trying to bring KM to the next level within our company. QAD is a software company that produces ERP software. While Knowledge Centric Support (KCS) seems like a great KM framework for our Support organization, I was wondering if something similar exists for Professional Services. In a first phase, I am interested to conduct an KM audit within our Services organization and to define KM related metrics around learning.

 

Please let me know if you know of a good framework. At the same time, have you ever tried to apply the framework described in "The Knowledge Management Fieldbook" written by Wendi R. Bukowitz and Ruth L. Williams?

 

I look forward to hearing what has worked for you.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas Blumer

 



Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
 

Thanks Thomas.  Anyone who admits to liking my stuff gets more!

 

There are lots of possible measures.  All of these can be absolute measures, percentages, relative to a baseline, or compared with best practices (e.g., APQC).  The following is not exhaustive – just off the top of my head.

 

Creation: See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/innovation-architecture

·         Publications, reports, presentations (research outputs)

·         Successful experiments, discoveries, new understanding (project success)

·         Lessons learned, management recommendations (organizational learning)

·         Innovations, prototypes, patents (products/services developed)  

 

Knowledge Management: See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/ksen-paradigm-shift-18-opt

·         Repositories in place, documents stored, successful searches (managing assets)

·         Views, Downloads, conversations, interactions (knowledge sharing)

·         Active Communities, social networks, outputs harvested (collaboration)

 

Preservation: (See: http://www.slideshare.net/albertsimard/cbc-capturing-knowledge-15

·         Expertise elicited, knowledge captured (continuously)

·         Legacy content available and searchable (future usefulness)

·         Job Blog in place (how knowledge work is actually done)

 

Use: See: http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/pubwarehouse/pdfs/27338.pdf

·         Distribution, accesses, views, downloads (passive knowledge transfer)

·         User interactions: explanations, consultations, demonstrations (active knowledge transfer)

·         Relevance, usability, timeliness (utility attributes)

·         User interactions: promotion, support, intervention (implementation support)

·         Implementation, application, use (the holy grail outcome!)

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-14-14 5:57 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hi Al,

 

Thank you for sharing your framework. I particularly liked Figure 3: "Defense R&D Canada as a system"

 

 

 

From a professional Services perspective, does anyone has good KPIs for such a model? Things I could think of that are important, but maybe not the best metrics because they focus on activity instead of outcome are:

 

Create:

-Training days

-Certifications acquired

 

Manage:

-Issues solved in forums

 

Use:

-Implementation days without escalation to R&D

-Number of escalations that happened too late

-Number of escalations that could have been avoided with proper training

 

Lost Knowledge:

-Turnover

-Retirements

 

Please let me know what worked for you well in the past. I still wonder if our VP of Support and the VP of Services actually agree to capture some of these metrics as they may reveal fundamental knowledge gaps.

 

Thanks,

 

Thomas

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...> wrote:

 

Thomas – See the following for a paper on Knowledge Services best practices. 

http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc121/p536618_A1b.pdf

 

I am currently working on an architecture to implement the framework.

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-13-14 2:40 PM
To: sikmleaders@...


Subject: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hello,

 

We are trying to bring KM to the next level within our company. QAD is a software company that produces ERP software. While Knowledge Centric Support (KCS) seems like a great KM framework for our Support organization, I was wondering if something similar exists for Professional Services. In a first phase, I am interested to conduct an KM audit within our Services organization and to define KM related metrics around learning.

 

Please let me know if you know of a good framework. At the same time, have you ever tried to apply the framework described in "The Knowledge Management Fieldbook" written by Wendi R. Bukowitz and Ruth L. Williams?

 

I look forward to hearing what has worked for you.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas Blumer

 


Re: Using metaphors to stimulate innovation #innovation

tomshort_san_francisco <tman9999@...>
 

This is a fun riff, Jean. I'm not exactly sure how the metaphor notion ties in with the idea of our role in stimulating conversations and connection, by acting as "agents provocateur".

And as for plant intelligence, this reminds me of a discussion I had a few years ago about leadership and geese flying in a V-formation. Is the goose at the front the flock leader? Or are they just the goose at the front?? Turns out it's simple physics - the lead goose expends more energy than the ones behind it, which makes flying in the V energy-efficient for the whole flock. But the only way it is sustainable is if the lead goose rotates out once in awhile.

So even though there is a lead goose that for all intents and purposes would appear to be leading the flock at any given time, this isn't the same a leader in the sense of people-based organizations. It would therefore be a mistake to attribute other qualities of leaders to the lead goose (or vice versa), since there is no correlation between their respective intents (the lead goose has no intent).

Plants, hives, ant colonies, termites - all exhibit complex system behavior, but this is function of evolved, hardwired behavior - not some arbitrary choice.

At least that's how I would position the discussion about the plants.

As for our role as agents provocateur, I like thinking about it that way. Since we can't own communities outside our own little KM sphere, it only makes sense that we would look for opportunities to stimulate their creation, and then figure out how to nudge someone to create (and own) them. This to me is an important KM activity.

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, Jean Graef <jean.graef@...> wrote:

A recent article in The New Yorker, "The Intelligent Plant<http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/12/23/131223fa_fact_pollan>," discusses the controversy surrounding research into the "intelligence" plants and remarks on the value of metaphors in stimulating the investigative imaginations of good scientists.

The article made me think about the KM role. Should we make more of an effort to identify unique, controversial, and contrarian points of view - both internal and external to our "home" organization? If so, how do we do it? One obvious connection is our work in creating and applying organization schemes ("taxonomies"), which can be used to make connections among seemingly unrelated ideas.

Has anyone else done any thinking or work along these lines?

Jean

PS - See also my blog entry<http://wp.me/p1KNjY-7k> on this topic.

------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Graef
www.montague.com<http://www.montague.com/>
@jgraef (Twitter)
montagueinstitute.wordpress.com/<http://montagueinstitute.wordpress.com/> (blog)
------------------------------------------------------------


Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Thomas Blumer
 

Hi Jeff,
 
Thank you for the two great references. I have looked at the APQC model in the past and like the fact that the assessment is tied to a benchmark. What is your experience with the acceptance of a KM audit/maturity model within a company (or the executives) when comparing a standardized solution like APQC to a homegrown one?
 
Thanks,
 
Thomas
 
 
 


On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Jeff Stemke <jstemke@...> wrote:
 

Here are two KM maturity models that I have worked with.

APQC KM Maturity model: covers a comprehensive range of topics (objectives, business case, budget, resources, change management, communition, processes, tools, metrics). Learn more: http://www.apqc.org/km-capability-assessment-tool

Innovation Value Institute develops a number of IT-related capability models. They have one for Knowledge Asset Management (http://ivi.nuim.ie/it-cmf/knowledge-asset-management). This is tightly focused on repositories and distribution of the assets in the organization.

In practice I have used elements of multiple models to fit my organization's needs.

--Jeff



Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Thomas Blumer
 

Hi Al,
 
Thank you for sharing your framework. I particularly liked Figure 3: "Defense R&D Canada as a system"
 
 
 
From a professional Services perspective, does anyone has good KPIs for such a model? Things I could think of that are important, but maybe not the best metrics because they focus on activity instead of outcome are:
 
Create:
-Training days
-Certifications acquired
 
Manage:
-Issues solved in forums
 
Use:
-Implementation days without escalation to R&D
-Number of escalations that happened too late
-Number of escalations that could have been avoided with proper training
 
Lost Knowledge:
-Turnover
-Retirements
 
Please let me know what worked for you well in the past. I still wonder if our VP of Support and the VP of Services actually agree to capture some of these metrics as they may reveal fundamental knowledge gaps.
 
Thanks,
 
Thomas
 
 
 


On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...> wrote:
 

Thomas – See the following for a paper on Knowledge Services best practices. 

http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc121/p536618_A1b.pdf

 

I am currently working on an architecture to implement the framework.

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-13-14 2:40 PM
To: sikmleaders@...


Subject: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hello,

 

We are trying to bring KM to the next level within our company. QAD is a software company that produces ERP software. While Knowledge Centric Support (KCS) seems like a great KM framework for our Support organization, I was wondering if something similar exists for Professional Services. In a first phase, I am interested to conduct an KM audit within our Services organization and to define KM related metrics around learning.

 

Please let me know if you know of a good framework. At the same time, have you ever tried to apply the framework described in "The Knowledge Management Fieldbook" written by Wendi R. Bukowitz and Ruth L. Williams?

 

I look forward to hearing what has worked for you.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas Blumer



Using metaphors to stimulate innovation #innovation

Jean Graef <jean.graef@...>
 

A recent article in The New Yorker, “The Intelligent Plant,” discusses the controversy surrounding research into the “intelligence” plants and remarks on the value of metaphors in stimulating the investigative imaginations of good scientists.

 

The article made me think about the KM role. Should we make more of an effort to identify unique, controversial, and contrarian points of view – both internal and external to our “home” organization? If so, how do we do it? One obvious connection is our work in creating and applying organization schemes (“taxonomies”), which can be used to make connections among seemingly unrelated ideas.

 

Has anyone else done any thinking or work along these lines?

 

Jean

 

PS – See also my blog entry on this topic.

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Jean Graef

www.montague.com

@jgraef (Twitter)

montagueinstitute.wordpress.com/ (blog)

------------------------------------------------------------

 

 


Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Jeff Stemke
 

Here are two KM maturity models that I have worked with.

APQC KM Maturity model: covers a comprehensive range of topics (objectives, business case, budget, resources, change management, communition, processes, tools, metrics). Learn more: http://www.apqc.org/km-capability-assessment-tool

Innovation Value Institute develops a number of IT-related capability models. They have one for Knowledge Asset Management (http://ivi.nuim.ie/it-cmf/knowledge-asset-management). This is tightly focused on repositories and distribution of the assets in the organization.

In practice I have used elements of multiple models to fit my organization's needs.

--Jeff


Re: Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
 

Thomas – See the following for a paper on Knowledge Services best practices. 

http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc121/p536618_A1b.pdf

 

I am currently working on an architecture to implement the framework.

 

Al Simard

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Blumer
Sent: January-13-14 2:40 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry)

 

 

Hello,

 

We are trying to bring KM to the next level within our company. QAD is a software company that produces ERP software. While Knowledge Centric Support (KCS) seems like a great KM framework for our Support organization, I was wondering if something similar exists for Professional Services. In a first phase, I am interested to conduct an KM audit within our Services organization and to define KM related metrics around learning.

 

Please let me know if you know of a good framework. At the same time, have you ever tried to apply the framework described in "The Knowledge Management Fieldbook" written by Wendi R. Bukowitz and Ruth L. Williams?

 

I look forward to hearing what has worked for you.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas Blumer

(805) 452 5731


Professional Services KM Framework (Software Industry) #maturity #metrics

Thomas Blumer
 

Hello,
 
We are trying to bring KM to the next level within our company. QAD is a software company that produces ERP software. While Knowledge Centric Support (KCS) seems like a great KM framework for our Support organization, I was wondering if something similar exists for Professional Services. In a first phase, I am interested to conduct an KM audit within our Services organization and to define KM related metrics around learning.
 
Please let me know if you know of a good framework. At the same time, have you ever tried to apply the framework described in "The Knowledge Management Fieldbook" written by Wendi R. Bukowitz and Ruth L. Williams?
 
I look forward to hearing what has worked for you.
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer
(805) 452 5731


Job Opening #jobs

Stan Garfield
 

Catherine Shinners shared this opening. If you know of other job openings of interest to the members of this community, please reply with details.  Thanks!


Director, Analytics, Prospect Research & Management

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Troy, NY

http://careers.insidehighered.com/rensselaer-polytechnic-institute/director-analytics-prospect-research-management/jobs/539754


Re: Google Groups and Forum Metrics #metrics #Google #CoP

Thomas Blumer
 

Hi Martin,
 
Thank you for the quick response. We use Confluence already for some of our departmental intranets and we love it. So far we have not yet looked into Confluence Questions but I assume we would have similar issues than with LifeRay. Most of our employees answer forum questions directly from their email client without going to the forum itself.
 
Anyone else with Google Group experience?
 
Thanks,
 
Thomas


On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Martin Cleaver <martin@...> wrote:
 

Hi Thomas,

For Knowledge Workers Toronto, I am currently evaluating Atlassian Confluence Questions (not least because my firm, Blended Perspectives, provides professional services around Atlassian products).

Perhaps you (and/or other here) would like to join our trial? Confluence Questions provides some metrics around the experts that it identifies - our evaluation will work better with some more people engaged.

Thanks,
   Martin.


On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Thomas Blumer <thomas.blumer777@...> wrote:
 

Hello,
 
We have moved our internal product forums from a LifeRay platform to Google Groups due to the ease of use of the tool. Our communities are growing quickly and I look for ways to measure the activities and impact of the forums without the need to read every single post.
 
Does anyone know of any tool that can monitor Google Groups activities? Here are some of the items we would like to measure:
-Number of questions answered
-Number of unanswered questions
-Average time to answer
 
Another challenge we have, since most of the answers are provided via email, is to determine which questions were truly resolved.
 
Any insights and ideas are highly appreciated.
 
Thank you and I wish everyone a happy 2014!
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer




Re: Google Groups and Forum Metrics #metrics #Google #CoP

Martin Cleaver <martin@...>
 

Hi Thomas,

For Knowledge Workers Toronto, I am currently evaluating Atlassian Confluence Questions (not least because my firm, Blended Perspectives, provides professional services around Atlassian products).

Perhaps you (and/or other here) would like to join our trial? Confluence Questions provides some metrics around the experts that it identifies - our evaluation will work better with some more people engaged.

Thanks,
   Martin.


On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Thomas Blumer <thomas.blumer777@...> wrote:
 

Hello,
 
We have moved our internal product forums from a LifeRay platform to Google Groups due to the ease of use of the tool. Our communities are growing quickly and I look for ways to measure the activities and impact of the forums without the need to read every single post.
 
Does anyone know of any tool that can monitor Google Groups activities? Here are some of the items we would like to measure:
-Number of questions answered
-Number of unanswered questions
-Average time to answer
 
Another challenge we have, since most of the answers are provided via email, is to determine which questions were truly resolved.
 
Any insights and ideas are highly appreciated.
 
Thank you and I wish everyone a happy 2014!
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer



Google Groups and Forum Metrics #metrics #Google #CoP

Thomas Blumer
 

Hello,
 
We have moved our internal product forums from a LifeRay platform to Google Groups due to the ease of use of the tool. Our communities are growing quickly and I look for ways to measure the activities and impact of the forums without the need to read every single post.
 
Does anyone know of any tool that can monitor Google Groups activities? Here are some of the items we would like to measure:
-Number of questions answered
-Number of unanswered questions
-Average time to answer
 
Another challenge we have, since most of the answers are provided via email, is to determine which questions were truly resolved.
 
Any insights and ideas are highly appreciated.
 
Thank you and I wish everyone a happy 2014!
 
Best regards,
 
Thomas Blumer


Re: SharePoint & iPad #SharePoint #mobile

David Swan <swan425@...>
 

There are several iPad applications for SharePoint - two that come to mind are Filamente and SharePluse.  Both of these facilitate connection with SharePoint sites for access to lists and libraries.  Neither of them does much with published pages as I remember.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Jean Graef <jean.graef@...> wrote:
 

Apparently there are several iPad apps for SharePoint. I would love to hear from anyone who’s used any of them.

 

Also, there’s a mobile SharePoint alternative called Huddle. Is anyone using that?

 

If I get any responses, I’ll post a summary to the list.

 

Jean

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Jean Graef

www.montague.com

@jgraef (Twitter)

montagueinstitute.wordpress.com/ (blog)

------------------------------------------------------------

 

 



Re: SharePoint & iPad #SharePoint #mobile

Susan Hanley
 

Some comments to Rob's answers below.




---In sikmleaders@{{emailDomain}}, <rbogue@...> wrote:

Jean – I’ll add my thoughts to Sue’s inline – and perhaps answer your questions…

 

However at the top – each approach has limitations.. you have to pick the solution where the limitations matter least.

 

Rob

 

-------------------

Robert L. Bogue, MS MVP: Microsoft Office SharePoint Server, MCSE, MCSA:Security, etc.

Find me Phone: (317) 844-5310  Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Also known as The SharePoint Shepherd Learn more at http://www.sharepointshepherd.com/

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Jean Graef
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 2:49 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] RE: SharePoint & iPad

 

 

Sue,

Thanks for your extensive reply. See my questions inline below.

 

Jean

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of sue@...
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 9:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] RE: SharePoint & iPad

 

 

I have used both Colligo Briefcase Pro and SharePlus, which allow you to replicate content from SharePoint on a mobile device. Harmon.ie has an app that allows you to interact with SharePoint on an iPad as well. These tools work great for document libraries and lists, and with harmon.ie, the Newsfeed and Yammer as well, but none of them replicate publishing pages, so it depends on your use case whether these products will solve a business need. For one of my current clients, we have a set of documentation that is published as publishing pages

Do you mean HTML pages, or just individual Office docs?

[RLB] SharePoint has a feature called publishing that creates structured pages of content.  These aren’t supported by the various tools for offline viewing.  There are technical reasons for it.  In most cases I don’t find this to be an issue – but it is for some folks.


[SH] Rob is correct (as usual!). I have a client that is using SharePoint for their intranet and has implemented all of their Policy "documents" as publishing pages (based on the Article template) in SharePoint. They wanted an offline solution for policy  delivery and we had hoped that one of the iPad apps would do it. Unfortunately, they don't. However, the Site Pages library of a SharePoint Team Site does replicate offline (I've only tested with this with Colligo Briefcase Pro) but the images on those pages don't show up in the offline view. Whether this matters or not depends, as Rob suggests, on what you are trying to view offline and on what device. Office docs replicate fine with the iPad apps.

and none of these products replicate the content when you are working offline, which was the problem we were trying to solve. If you want to edit documents on your iPad, you may need to have an additional product, like Docs to Go, depending on the scenario.

But, you don't always need a mobile app to access and interact with SharePoint sites on an iPad. With SharePoint 2013, you can use SkyDrive Pro to sync documents o ffline. You can also access SharePoint sites from the browser on the iPad and edit documents using Office Web Apps. I work with several Office 365 SharePoint sites and also SharePoint 2013 on premises sites that have been enabled for web access and I can do quite a bit from my iPad - without using any of the iPad apps. So, I guess as always, the real question to think about is: what are you trying to do on your iPad? The products that sync certain types of content work great - but whether you need them depends on what version of SharePoint you are using, how the environment is set up, and what you want to do. I tend to use a combination of "all of the above," but in different usage scenarios.

In your experience, which KM use cases are the most common – e.g. closing deals in sales, solving customer problems, team collaboration in product development, gathering competitive intelligence?

[RLB] My input is that every situation is different.  There’s not one KM activity that needs off-line solutions.  Sometimes it’s a knowledge base for a service technician that travels.  Other times it’s a sales briefing book to help them know how to compete.  Other times it’s other things… it just depends.

[SH] I agree with Rob, way too difficult to generalize and there is not one specific use case. Basically, if you need SharePoint documents offline on an iPad, there are different ways (and apps) that make that happen. If you need something other than documents, then some content works well with the apps and some does not. I think most people want to sync list content or documents so the scenario that tripped up my client is probably not the norm.


If a client has SharePoint 2013 or Office 365, when would they need a mobile app, since they could use SkyDrive & Office Web apps?

[RLB] Two answers: 1) Performance – if they’re on slow connections then performance from the cloud can be slow.  2) Off-Line – If you want to work on an airplane without Wifi… you’ll need to have the documents with you.

[SH] I think I may need to clarify. Microsoft provides an iPad app so that you can sync your SkyDrive Pro library to your iPad. The Microsoft app will allow you to work with those documents offline if your solution meets the criteria described here: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/office365-sharepoint-online-enterprise-help/use-the-skydrive-pro-app-on-an-iphone-or-ipad-HA104005688.aspx#_Toc366676484. You still need a mobile app, but it's the free one from Microsoft. But, this is ONLY if you want to work offline on your iPad.


If you want to work offline on your laptop (as opposed to your iPad), you essentially get the same functionality by sync'ing SkyDrive Pro to your laptop. That would allow you to work with documents offline on your laptop and then sync back to SharePoint when you re-connect - for the scenarios that Rob mentions above.


I have a client that used Huddle for a while but is now using SharePoint 2013 for all team collaboration, which they think is much easier to use and better meets their needs.

I would be happy to answer specific questions if you want more information - and I can t est out a use case for you using any of the tools since I've got them all!

Sue

 

Susan Hanley

sue@...

301-469-0770 (office)

301-442-0127 (mobile)

www.susanhanley.com

blog: www.networkworld.com/community/sharepoint

5761 - 5780 of 9474