Date   

Re: KM ROI #value #question

Murray Jennex
 

by statistically validated I mean we surveyed KM practitioners and researchers on what they saw as success on a KM initiative as well as how they judged the success of that project/initiative.  we used principle component factor analysis to assess the factors and their grouping, chronbach alphas to judge internal consistency, correlation analysis to make sure all factors were necessary, and regression analysis of each factor group to KM project/initiative success.  The list I sent out were all factors considered statistically significant.  Yes, some are qualitative but the item was stated for instance: "as a result of the KM project/initiative we made changes to our organization's KM goals."  It turns out that this happens more in successful KM projects and initiatives than it does in those not as successful....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Bounds <km@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2020 5:25 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM ROI #question

Hi Murray,
What do you mean by "statistically validated"?
Surely saying something like "Changes to the organization's KM goals is a measure of KM success" is tautological at best?
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 16/10/2020 7:26 am, Murray Jennex via groups.io wrote:
we statistically validated the following set of KM success measures:

Impact on business processes (6 measures):
1.         Improved the efficiency of the supported processes
2.         Reduced costs for the supported business process
3.         Positive return on investment for the supported processes
4.         Improved the effectiveness of the supported processes
5.         Improved decision making in the supported processes
6.         Improved resource allocation in the supported process
Impact on KM Strategy (4 measures):
1.         Changes to the organization’s KM goals
2.         Creation or modification of knowledge related key performance indicators (KPIs)
3.         Changes to the way the organization assessed knowledge use in the organization
4.         Changes in the organization’s incentives for using and sharing knowledge
Leadership/Management Support (4 measures):
1.         Increased verbal/political support for KM by top management
2.         Increased financial support for KM by top management
3.         Increased awareness of KM by top management
4.         Increased use/reliance on KM by top management
Knowledge Content (3 measures)
1.         Increased use or intention to use of knowledge content
2.         Increased identification of needed knowledge content and knowledge content sources
3.         Increased demand and/or searching for knowledge content

thanks....murray jennex, 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sachin Joshi <sachinjoshi.a@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Oct 15, 2020 7:08 am
Subject: [SIKM] KM ROI #question

Hello all, this is my first post on this very insightful forum/group.

I am KM consultant in IT organization. We implement and monitor lot of good KM practices in our teams. We also see good benefits of all these, unfortunately showcasing them as quantitative benefits is always a challenge (I am talking about benefits such as reduction in xxxx, improvement in xxxx and so on... not about quantitative KM dashboard data such as no. of SMEs, no. of posts, no. of assets, no. of sessions, etc.).

The question which is always asked on KM performance is, what is the benefit. Change in culture, improvement in collaborating, creation of assets, etc. is not an answer to this. since this is just an output but not measure of benefit/success. Can someone share, how we can correlate KM with business benefits OR how can we show return on investment in KM. Thank you.


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Robert L. Bogue
 

Matt -

Re: Personal agency and going too far - Agreed it's not one sided. I make the assumption if a healthy person walks into a toxic environment they'll adapt to it or they'll reject it and find something else. Absolutely if organizations need to change to be more supportive they should be. However, I see many more cases where people have not developed their internal agency/efficacy sufficiently. (in my opinion)

Re: Resilience training - Management (and all of us) want simple fixes. Sometimes there aren't simple fixes.

Re: Courage - You can't read yourself to be courageous. You can, however, cultivate a different way of assessing stressors so that they hold less power over you. Also, we believe that courage should be limitless -- no. It's a tool to help us survive. Not being "too" courageous is valuable.

Re: Course/Training/market - It's just an observation. Most of the training that people are getting is "free" because it's bundled with other things. Efficacy doesn't matter. They're looking to check the box that they've done the thing they were asked to do.

Rob

-------------------
Robert L. Bogue
O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog
Want to be confident about your change management efforts? https://ConfidentChangeManagement.com
Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it (for free)

-----Original Message-----
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Matt Moore via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 9:07 PM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM - Resilience / Burnout

Robert,

"As for fear of reprimands, I think this where we look at how to help/support people into being more wholly human filled with self-efficacy and resilience. When we do this they have a greater capacity for courage. (Courage is not the absence of fear but moving forward in it’s presence.) This greater capacity for courage decreases the need for the organization to be focused on reducing fear."

Now I don't mind the narrative around resilience and it is important to remember that we all have personal agency. Looking at your course, I think it's fine as far as it goes. The risk with what you are saying is that we put all the burden onto the individual. If we find two groups doing similar work and one group has high levels of staff turnover and sick leave, should our first thought be: " Ah ha! One of these groups needs resilience training!"

Training courses for someone (staff or their managers) tend to be the first thing that is reached for when executives face an organisational challenge. In part because they do not require the organisation as a whole to change. In much the same way that people reach for a medication when they have a health problem. For many people, the solution to obesity is lowering your calorific intake compared to your calorific output. But that's hard work. If only there were a pill to make me thin. Likewise, giving people training on stuff (how to be resilient, how not to be racist) is all very well - but unless you do some hard yards (e.g. changing the design of work, changing reward systems, maybe even replacing some people), its impact will be limited.

I suspect some things (e.g. leadership, courage) cannot be learned from reading a book or completing an elearning course. I suspect that they must be lived. N.B. I am a fan of books and read a lot of them.
But I am not a very courageous person. Perhaps I have not read the correct books.

"We believe we’re largely unsuccessful in getting employee engagement-type companies to leverage our materials because we don’t blame the company and we’re concerned about helping the person learn about their own self efficacy."

Without knowing the details, it's hard to comment on this except to say that from what I can see, there's a ton of resilience training out there (esp. after COVID) so I don't think that there's the lack of a market in terms of supply or demand.

Regards,

Matt


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Robert L. Bogue
 

Arthur –

 

I don’t equate social interactions with emotions directly.  There is definitely research on the increased retention based on group work but I’ve never seen that connected to emotions – I’d love to see resources if you have them.

 

Rob

 

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

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Want to be confident about your change management efforts?  https://ConfidentChangeManagement.com

Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it (for free)

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Arthur Shelley via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 8:57 PM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM

 

Hello SIKMers,

 

I have been watching this thread with great interest and reflecting on the insights being shared. Yesterday I finished an article on the importance of social interactions in knowledge cocreation and learning (it will be published on an open source journal in December - will share the link here when available). 

 

There is a significant body of evidence to support the value of social interactions (and therefore emotions) to enhance the quality of learning. Although there are also some who argue against this, my own experiences in formal teaching, executive education and professional development practice have all reinforced this is critical. This is especially so after the formal parts of the learning have been completed, and as Murray highlights - the putting the learning into practice. Socialisation with peers in the application of the learning in practice helps to reinforce the learning and support the refining and extension of knowledge over time.  

 

Humans are social beings and this means that emotions influence what we do (either consciously for those with strong self-awareness, or subconsciously for those who are not so self aware). Subconscious bias is a good example of this. Who we Trust, and therefore share our knowledge with is another. For most people, Emotions have more impact on decision-making than logic (this is not new - refer Aristotles Rhetoric - Ethos, Pathos, Logos). 

 

When we interact socially we learn much more deeply than when we learn alone (both in formal learning and in our general life situations). This is because we share the diversity of perspectives on how we interpret the knowledge that is being shared (and who we receive that "insight/version" from, which determines whether we accept it or not). 

 

You can read more about this in there open access journals (acknowledging Murrays point that people don't read as much formal literature now)

here (free)

Applied Social Learning Ecosystems:

 

and here (not open, but can read abstracts free)

https://journals.sagepub.com/home/jee

Arthur Shelley

Founder, Intelligent Answers

Producer Creative Melbourne

@Metaphorage

+61 413 047 408



On 17 Oct 2020, at 11:07, Matt Moore <matt@...> wrote:



April,

 

"This work that we do in KM is very much dependent on the management behaviours and the measurements and KPIs that often provoke competition rather than collaboration."

 

Well said! I have had many conversations like this:

Manager: I want my people to collaborate more. Can you give me some software that will do that?

Me: What do you reward them for?

Manager: Individual performance.

Me: I see. Would you consider changing that?

Manager: No. Can't you just hurry up and give me the software?

 

Regards,

 

Matt


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Robert L. Bogue
 

Re: LaLoux's work - It goes too far. In some of the follow up research I did, I think while reading Red Goldfish (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2017/06/05/book-review-red-goldfish-motivating-sales-loyalty-shared-passion-purpose/) I realized that most of the lack of hierarchy wasn't real. It's sort of like Joy, Inc. (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2015/11/23/book-review-joy-inc/) he spun a good tale -- but knowing software development like I do I know that the approach doesn't work well. I do think that we're evolving to having less fundamental concerns. I don't know that I'd agree either if higher = better, rather than just different.

Re: Fear - Absolutely, fear based motivation still exists. However, I do believe it's edging down particularly as we maintain low-levels of unemployment and it becomes easier for people to find alternative work that is reasonable.

Rob

-------------------
Robert L. Bogue
O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog
Want to be confident about your change management efforts? https://ConfidentChangeManagement.com
Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it (for free)

-----Original Message-----
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Matt Moore via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 7:56 PM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM

Robert,

"In my review of The Fearless Organization, I basically mentioned that fear is an inherent part of being human. It’s not possible for an organization to remove all fear from the equation – nor is it their role. It is, however, in their best interests to find a place where fear is minimized and productivity is maximized."

I agree that fear is an inherent part of being human and I agree that the book does not say fear can be completely removed. However it does call itself "The Fearless Organisation" and it doesn't have a lot to say about the broader contexts that shape human behaviour beyond group dynamics. It's not a bad book - but like most leadership books, it is at best half true. As for productivity being maximised when fear is minimised, I would like to believe that it is true but I have seen enough instances of managers using fear to get results and to be rewarded for it that leave me cynical.

I have very mixed feelings about LaLoux's work. I actually read RO a while ago - and I was a bit underwhelmed. I like the idea of non-hierarchical organisations (in much the same way that I like the idea of fearless organisations) - but I don't necessarily buy his arguments that this change is inevitable. Plus the Spiral Dynamics type stuff that underpins it reminds me a lot of the Whig Theory of History or 18/19th Century German Romanticism mixed with some New Age Esalen malarky. While I believe that our societies and economies change, I do not believe that we are evolving to some higher plane.

"So, I think organizations are changing to use less fear based motivations"

I think the trend for the last 50 years has been that it is increasingly unacceptable amongst the enlightened managerial classes to say that using fear is acceptable. The distaste for naked tyranny doesn't mean that we won't split the jobs where fear is unacceptable from those where it is. Facebook and Google outsource their content moderation. Apple outsource their manufacturing. The freedom accorded to a manager of a dev team in Amazon Web Services manager vs an Amazon warehouse worker are very different. And we should remember that the second biggest economy in the world has a very different set of values to the US and Europe.

Regards,

Matt

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:11 PM Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:

Matt –

In my review of The Fearless Organization (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2019/06/24/book-review-the-fearless-organization-creating-psychological-safety-in-the-workplace-for-learning-innovation-and-growth/, for those not tracking the other thread), I basically mentioned that fear is an inherent part of being human. It’s not possible for an organization to remove all fear from the equation – nor is it their role. It is, however, in their best interests to find a place where fear is minimized and productivity is maximized.

With regard to organizational structure and the systemic use of fear,
Fredrick LaLoux’s work in Reinventing Organizations
(https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2017/06/19/book-review-reinvent
ing-organizations-guide-creating-organizations-inspired-next-stage-hum
an-consciousness/) is good at showing this as an evolution.
Observationally and through my other research, I’d support that we’re
evolving our management style and that while fear was often used as a
mechanism for motivation, it’s a bit unstable and because we’re
recognizing that more-and-more it seems to be falling out of favor.
Reinforcing this point is the work of Chuck Underwood in America’s
Generations
(https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2016/09/19/book-review-americas
-generations-in-the-workplace-marketplace-and-living-room/). While
Chuck and I have vastly different styles, his observation of
generations across time is intriguing. (As he points out generations
are largely based on the country that people live so the applicability
across the globe may be limited – but understanding the shift across
generations is interesting to me.)

So, I think organizations are changing to use less fear based motivations – and that’s a good thing.

As for fear of reprimands, I think this where we look at how to help/support people into being more wholly human filled with self-efficacy and resilience. When we do this they have a greater capacity for courage. (Courage is not the absence of fear but moving forward in it’s presence.) This greater capacity for courage decreases the need for the organization to be focused on reducing fear.

All this being said, the transition isn’t done. Terri (my wife and
partner) and I wrote Extinguish Burnout: A Practical Guide to
Prevention and Recovery for The Society for Human Resource Management
(SHRM) last year. As we’ve tried to engage others to partner with on
the materials we’ve run into two key problems. First, the
organizations we’re working with are selling that there’s something
broken in the organization that they know how to fix. Second, that
burnout is exclusively associated with work. Despite the WHO’s
inclusion of burnout as an ICD-10 code which lists it as an
occupational phenomenon, it’s not. This is evident even in
Frudenberger’s early work on the topic. The problem is a political
one between the WHO and the APA and is negatively influenced by
Maslach. (I’ll stop there.)

We believe we’re largely unsuccessful in getting employee engagement-type companies to leverage our materials because we don’t blame the company and we’re concerned about helping the person learn about their own self efficacy. For what it’s worth all the materials – including the course – are free until at least December 20th as our gift to the world.


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Matt Moore
 

Robert,

"As for fear of reprimands, I think this where we look at how to
help/support people into being more wholly human filled with
self-efficacy and resilience. When we do this they have a greater
capacity for courage. (Courage is not the absence of fear but moving
forward in it’s presence.) This greater capacity for courage
decreases the need for the organization to be focused on reducing
fear."

Now I don't mind the narrative around resilience and it is important
to remember that we all have personal agency. Looking at your course,
I think it's fine as far as it goes. The risk with what you are saying
is that we put all the burden onto the individual. If we find two
groups doing similar work and one group has high levels of staff
turnover and sick leave, should our first thought be: " Ah ha! One of
these groups needs resilience training!"

Training courses for someone (staff or their managers) tend to be the
first thing that is reached for when executives face an organisational
challenge. In part because they do not require the organisation as a
whole to change. In much the same way that people reach for a
medication when they have a health problem. For many people, the
solution to obesity is lowering your calorific intake compared to your
calorific output. But that's hard work. If only there were a pill to
make me thin. Likewise, giving people training on stuff (how to be
resilient, how not to be racist) is all very well - but unless you do
some hard yards (e.g. changing the design of work, changing reward
systems, maybe even replacing some people), its impact will be
limited.

I suspect some things (e.g. leadership, courage) cannot be learned
from reading a book or completing an elearning course. I suspect that
they must be lived. N.B. I am a fan of books and read a lot of them.
But I am not a very courageous person. Perhaps I have not read the
correct books.

"We believe we’re largely unsuccessful in getting employee
engagement-type companies to leverage our materials because we don’t
blame the company and we’re concerned about helping the person learn
about their own self efficacy."

Without knowing the details, it's hard to comment on this except to
say that from what I can see, there's a ton of resilience training out
there (esp. after COVID) so I don't think that there's the lack of a
market in terms of supply or demand.

Regards,

Matt


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Arthur Shelley
 

Hello SIKMers,

I have been watching this thread with great interest and reflecting on the insights being shared. Yesterday I finished an article on the importance of social interactions in knowledge cocreation and learning (it will be published on an open source journal in December - will share the link here when available). 

There is a significant body of evidence to support the value of social interactions (and therefore emotions) to enhance the quality of learning. Although there are also some who argue against this, my own experiences in formal teaching, executive education and professional development practice have all reinforced this is critical. This is especially so after the formal parts of the learning have been completed, and as Murray highlights - the putting the learning into practice. Socialisation with peers in the application of the learning in practice helps to reinforce the learning and support the refining and extension of knowledge over time.  

Humans are social beings and this means that emotions influence what we do (either consciously for those with strong self-awareness, or subconsciously for those who are not so self aware). Subconscious bias is a good example of this. Who we Trust, and therefore share our knowledge with is another. For most people, Emotions have more impact on decision-making than logic (this is not new - refer Aristotles Rhetoric - Ethos, Pathos, Logos). 

When we interact socially we learn much more deeply than when we learn alone (both in formal learning and in our general life situations). This is because we share the diversity of perspectives on how we interpret the knowledge that is being shared (and who we receive that "insight/version" from, which determines whether we accept it or not). 

You can read more about this in there open access journals (acknowledging Murrays point that people don't read as much formal literature now)
here (free)
Applied Social Learning Ecosystems:
http://journals.sfu.ca/jalt/index.php/jalt/article/view/19 


and here (not open, but can read abstracts free)
https://journals.sagepub.com/home/jee

Arthur Shelley
Founder, Intelligent Answers
Producer Creative Melbourne
www.OrganizationalZoo.com
@Metaphorage
+61 413 047 408
https://au.linkedin.com/pub/arthur-shelley/1/4bb/528 

On 17 Oct 2020, at 11:07, Matt Moore <matt@...> wrote:


April,

"This work that we do in KM is very much dependent on the management behaviours and the measurements and KPIs that often provoke competition rather than collaboration."

Well said! I have had many conversations like this:
Manager: I want my people to collaborate more. Can you give me some software that will do that?
Me: What do you reward them for?
Manager: Individual performance.
Me: I see. Would you consider changing that?
Manager: No. Can't you just hurry up and give me the software?

Regards,

Matt


Re: KM ROI #value #question

Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Sachin,

KM4Dev Journal was recently good enough to publish a journal article on mine on the topic. It is my view that relative return on investment (RROI) is generally the correct benefits evaluation tool for KM programs.

Excerpting from the article, I examine four ways of determining benefit:

  • ROI can be used by a government regulator for the purpose of optimising like-for-like process efficiency (i.e.performance improvements that can be made without compromising the quality of their work).

  • SROI measures may be adopted by a service enterprise to demonstrate the theory of change (TOC) underpinning its corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, increasing the benefits accruing to the company brand.

  • RROI measures can be used by a public company CEO to justify their strategic choices to a board, for a marketing division to justify their spending mix – or indeed, for a KM manager to sell their program to their boss. It is worth noting that RROI is also increasingly relevant for the purposes of valuing impact on the creation or curation of external communities.

  • CBA assessments may be undertaken by not-for-profits to make a case for the release of funds by government or philanthropic services for the use of the non-profit.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 16/10/2020 12:08 am, Sachin Joshi wrote:

Hello all, this is my first post on this very insightful forum/group.

I am KM consultant in IT organization. We implement and monitor lot of good KM practices in our teams. We also see good benefits of all these, unfortunately showcasing them as quantitative benefits is always a challenge (I am talking about benefits such as reduction in xxxx, improvement in xxxx and so on... not about quantitative KM dashboard data such as no. of SMEs, no. of posts, no. of assets, no. of sessions, etc.).

The question which is always asked on KM performance is, what is the benefit. Change in culture, improvement in collaborating, creation of assets, etc. is not an answer to this. since this is just an output but not measure of benefit/success. Can someone share, how we can correlate KM with business benefits OR how can we show return on investment in KM. Thank you.


Re: KM ROI #value #question

Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Murray,

What do you mean by "statistically validated"?

Surely saying something like "Changes to the organization's KM goals is a measure of KM success" is tautological at best?

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 16/10/2020 7:26 am, Murray Jennex via groups.io wrote:

we statistically validated the following set of KM success measures:

Impact on business processes (6 measures):
1.         Improved the efficiency of the supported processes
2.         Reduced costs for the supported business process
3.         Positive return on investment for the supported processes
4.         Improved the effectiveness of the supported processes
5.         Improved decision making in the supported processes
6.         Improved resource allocation in the supported process
Impact on KM Strategy (4 measures):
1.         Changes to the organization’s KM goals
2.         Creation or modification of knowledge related key performance indicators (KPIs)
3.         Changes to the way the organization assessed knowledge use in the organization
4.         Changes in the organization’s incentives for using and sharing knowledge
Leadership/Management Support (4 measures):
1.         Increased verbal/political support for KM by top management
2.         Increased financial support for KM by top management
3.         Increased awareness of KM by top management
4.         Increased use/reliance on KM by top management
Knowledge Content (3 measures)
1.         Increased use or intention to use of knowledge content
2.         Increased identification of needed knowledge content and knowledge content sources
3.         Increased demand and/or searching for knowledge content

thanks....murray jennex, 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sachin Joshi <sachinjoshi.a@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Oct 15, 2020 7:08 am
Subject: [SIKM] KM ROI #question

Hello all, this is my first post on this very insightful forum/group.

I am KM consultant in IT organization. We implement and monitor lot of good KM practices in our teams. We also see good benefits of all these, unfortunately showcasing them as quantitative benefits is always a challenge (I am talking about benefits such as reduction in xxxx, improvement in xxxx and so on... not about quantitative KM dashboard data such as no. of SMEs, no. of posts, no. of assets, no. of sessions, etc.).

The question which is always asked on KM performance is, what is the benefit. Change in culture, improvement in collaborating, creation of assets, etc. is not an answer to this. since this is just an output but not measure of benefit/success. Can someone share, how we can correlate KM with business benefits OR how can we show return on investment in KM. Thank you.


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Matt Moore
 

April,

"This work that we do in KM is very much dependent on the management behaviours and the measurements and KPIs that often provoke competition rather than collaboration."

Well said! I have had many conversations like this:
Manager: I want my people to collaborate more. Can you give me some software that will do that?
Me: What do you reward them for?
Manager: Individual performance.
Me: I see. Would you consider changing that?
Manager: No. Can't you just hurry up and give me the software?

Regards,

Matt


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Matt Moore
 

Murray,

Some comments on virtual vs classroom learning and our current pandemic.
- Many students are pretty stressed. A lot have lost sources of income
or have had to move back in with their parents. Being stressed and
distracted does not help with learning. A classroom is space where you
can shut out the pressures of the world for a while. It is a
"safe(ish) space" in terms of parent, sibling, child or housemate
wandering in and demanding your attention.
- In my experience, simply reading something is not enough. Students
need to apply it in some way and then receive active coaching on their
application. They may have been getting more of that in the classroom.

Regards,

Matt

On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 6:31 AM Murray Jennex via groups.io
<murphjen@...> wrote:

Matt, you make the statement below about the huge consumption of business books and seminars and it struck me that just because people read them, it doesn't mean they can take that knowledge and put it into action. We have had to do remote teaching during covid and I am surprised at how little people will read and turn it into action. My students meet with me weekly via zoom, I present material, I go over it and show them how to use it, but I'm finding that few use it near as well as when this is done in a class. I'm kind of surprised at this as unlike regular class, I post a zoom recording of what we do, and yet few are using it. As an author as well as a teacher I like to think that by making knowledge available they will be able to use it. I suspect there must be an emotional aspect to hearing material in person that is not being recognized. I do know I can make good eye contact in person and get a read on what they think about the material that I can't do over zoom. I also suspect this is true about simply reading material from a business book. I've been following the conversation about and don't think much about safe spaces and such as I do this with students by pointing out that the safest space they will have is the classroom when compared to a work environment, doesn't seem to matter. Making it stressful doesn't help either. I'm seeing less than 30% engagement (probably about 20-25%). So my bottom line questions are: (with respect to knowledge sharing and getting people to put knowledge in action)

what emotions are we missing?
how do we read/sense them?
how do we address these emotions and turn them into motivators?

what I'm seeing now is a focus on life and doing the daily things and while people want to change and improve by using knowledge, they either don't have the energy or time......murray jennex


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Matt Moore
 

Robert,

"In my review of The Fearless Organization, I basically mentioned that
fear is an inherent part of being human. It’s not possible for an
organization to remove all fear from the equation – nor is it their
role. It is, however, in their best interests to find a place where
fear is minimized and productivity is maximized."

I agree that fear is an inherent part of being human and I agree that
the book does not say fear can be completely removed. However it does
call itself "The Fearless Organisation" and it doesn't have a lot to
say about the broader contexts that shape human behaviour beyond group
dynamics. It's not a bad book - but like most leadership books, it is
at best half true. As for productivity being maximised when fear is
minimised, I would like to believe that it is true but I have seen
enough instances of managers using fear to get results and to be
rewarded for it that leave me cynical.

I have very mixed feelings about LaLoux's work. I actually read RO a
while ago - and I was a bit underwhelmed. I like the idea of
non-hierarchical organisations (in much the same way that I like the
idea of fearless organisations) - but I don't necessarily buy his
arguments that this change is inevitable. Plus the Spiral Dynamics
type stuff that underpins it reminds me a lot of the Whig Theory of
History or 18/19th Century German Romanticism mixed with some New Age
Esalen malarky. While I believe that our societies and economies
change, I do not believe that we are evolving to some higher plane.

"So, I think organizations are changing to use less fear based motivations"

I think the trend for the last 50 years has been that it is
increasingly unacceptable amongst the enlightened managerial classes
to say that using fear is acceptable. The distaste for naked tyranny
doesn't mean that we won't split the jobs where fear is unacceptable
from those where it is. Facebook and Google outsource their content
moderation. Apple outsource their manufacturing. The freedom accorded
to a manager of a dev team in Amazon Web Services manager vs an Amazon
warehouse worker are very different. And we should remember that the
second biggest economy in the world has a very different set of values
to the US and Europe.

Regards,

Matt

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:11 PM Robert L. Bogue
<rbogue@...> wrote:

Matt –

In my review of The Fearless Organization (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2019/06/24/book-review-the-fearless-organization-creating-psychological-safety-in-the-workplace-for-learning-innovation-and-growth/, for those not tracking the other thread), I basically mentioned that fear is an inherent part of being human. It’s not possible for an organization to remove all fear from the equation – nor is it their role. It is, however, in their best interests to find a place where fear is minimized and productivity is maximized.

With regard to organizational structure and the systemic use of fear, Fredrick LaLoux’s work in Reinventing Organizations (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2017/06/19/book-review-reinventing-organizations-guide-creating-organizations-inspired-next-stage-human-consciousness/) is good at showing this as an evolution. Observationally and through my other research, I’d support that we’re evolving our management style and that while fear was often used as a mechanism for motivation, it’s a bit unstable and because we’re recognizing that more-and-more it seems to be falling out of favor. Reinforcing this point is the work of Chuck Underwood in America’s Generations (https://thorprojects.com/blog/archive/2016/09/19/book-review-americas-generations-in-the-workplace-marketplace-and-living-room/). While Chuck and I have vastly different styles, his observation of generations across time is intriguing. (As he points out generations are largely based on the country that people live so the applicability across the globe may be limited – but understanding the shift across generations is interesting to me.)

So, I think organizations are changing to use less fear based motivations – and that’s a good thing.

As for fear of reprimands, I think this where we look at how to help/support people into being more wholly human filled with self-efficacy and resilience. When we do this they have a greater capacity for courage. (Courage is not the absence of fear but moving forward in it’s presence.) This greater capacity for courage decreases the need for the organization to be focused on reducing fear.

All this being said, the transition isn’t done. Terri (my wife and partner) and I wrote Extinguish Burnout: A Practical Guide to Prevention and Recovery for The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) last year. As we’ve tried to engage others to partner with on the materials we’ve run into two key problems. First, the organizations we’re working with are selling that there’s something broken in the organization that they know how to fix. Second, that burnout is exclusively associated with work. Despite the WHO’s inclusion of burnout as an ICD-10 code which lists it as an occupational phenomenon, it’s not. This is evident even in Frudenberger’s early work on the topic. The problem is a political one between the WHO and the APA and is negatively influenced by Maslach. (I’ll stop there.)

We believe we’re largely unsuccessful in getting employee engagement-type companies to leverage our materials because we don’t blame the company and we’re concerned about helping the person learn about their own self efficacy. For what it’s worth all the materials – including the course – are free until at least December 20th as our gift to the world.


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Aprill Allen
 

My belief is that the recognition at work isn’t in place to support any desire to change at work. And, If work is sending them to training, do they even want to be there, themselves? 

There’s the intrinsic desire to grow and change, but to then apply that changed behaviour in the workplace and probably have it go unacknowledged... I don’t blame people for giving up trying. 

This work that we do in KM is very much dependent on the management behaviours and the measurements and KPIs that often provoke competition rather than collaboration. 

On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 at 6:31 am, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
Matt, you make the statement below about the huge consumption of business books and seminars and it struck me that just because people read them, it doesn't mean they can take that knowledge and put it into action.  We have had to do remote teaching during covid and I am surprised at how little people will read and turn it into action.  My students meet with me weekly via zoom, I present material, I go over it and show them how to use it, but I'm finding that few use it near as well as when this is done in a class.  I'm kind of surprised at this as unlike regular class, I post a zoom recording of what we do, and yet few are using it.  As an author as well as a teacher I like to think that by making knowledge available they will be able to use it.  I suspect there must be an emotional aspect to hearing material in person that is not being recognized.  I do know I can make good eye contact in person and get a read on what they think about the material that I can't do over zoom.  I also suspect this is true about simply reading material from a business book.  I've been following the conversation about and don't think much about safe spaces and such as I do this with students by pointing out that the safest space they will have is the classroom when compared to a work environment, doesn't seem to matter.  Making it stressful doesn't help either.  I'm seeing less than 30% engagement (probably about 20-25%).  So my bottom line questions are: (with respect to knowledge sharing and getting people to put knowledge in action)

what emotions are we missing?
how do we read/sense them?
how do we address these emotions and turn them into motivators?

what I'm seeing now is a focus on life and doing the daily things and while people want to change and improve by using knowledge, they either don't have the energy or time......murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore <matt@...>
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2020 11:12 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM - Fear

 Tom,

I mostly agree with the points you make - and I think that they can be applied to not just psychological safety but to many management techniques.

Most organisations and their managers say they want to high-performing but they don’t take the actions necessary to be high-performing. As you say, mediocrity is enough. Don’t rock the boat.

I’d also say that teams can do all the things that “high-performing teams” are supposed to do and still fail. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can do all the things that the HBR articles and business books tell you to do and still wind up broke.

I’m not saying this to ignore the importance of personal responsibility or the need for personal learning & improvement.

I remain struck by the huge consumption of business books and articles and executive seminar series, training programs etc and the available data which suggests that most people don’t like their jobs or think much of their managers.

In 2001, Gallup found that 30% of US workers surveyed were engaged. In 2020, Gallup found that 31% of workers were engaged.

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result - what does that say about our business culture? And what does it say about our collective and individual abilities to cross The Knowing Doing Gap?

Regards,

Matt Moore
+61 423 784 504

On Oct 17, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:


[Edited Message Follows]
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:45 AM, Matt Moore wrote:
However, if creating a psychologically safe organisation was the most important thing for organisational success, there would be more of them.
Maybe. OTOH, most organizations - the miracle of organizations, actually - can get by on mediocrity. Pull employees from the middle of the bell curve, put them into pre-configured jobs, give them a bit a training, and voila - cars get designed and built. So use a bit of stick as needed - can’t hurt anything.

But not all organizations can get away with that. Some need truly high-performing individuals who work on high-performing teams. For these teams, psychological safety is central, as Google discovered in their research on high performing teams.
https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it 

This is, in an odd sort of way, analogous to why most organizations don’t do After Action Learning, even though the military has shown it to be very effective in improving processes and reducing risk. If it’s so effective, why don’t all companies use it? Simple: no one dies in companies in the course of doing their jobs (well, usually). That, coupled with the political risk/fear of calling out your superior for a bad plan of action - which is a central aspect of AAL work - means that the cultural toll of doing it is greater than the perceived potential benefit (incremental process improvement). Just sayin’.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts

--
--

Aprill Allen
Founder and Managing Director | Knowledge Bird
Knowledge management consulting & KCS Trainer
M: +61 400 101 961
knowledgebird.com


Re: How are we managing the knowledge shared in this group? #curation #expertise-location #profiles

Aprill Allen
 

In addition to what Stan has shared, some members have also filled out their member profiles. 

if you are looking at this group via the Groups.io website, you can click on the member directory to find people who may have listed their particular expertise. 

We have been piloting a community champions project to welcome new members and encourage filling out the member profiles, amongst other things. We also had plans to facilitate group sessions around KM topics. This is something we’d still like to do, and are yet to schedule any trial events.
if you would like a calendar invite to the next champions catch-up call, please let me know and I’ll include you.

thank you to Kate, Catherine, Ivan, Michael, Eva, Beth and Jamie for all your champion efforts, so far.

 


--

Aprill Allen
Founder and Managing Director | Knowledge Bird
KM Consulting & KCS Training
M: +61 (0)400 101 961
knowledgebird.com


Podcast with Alan Pelz-Sharpe - Why Business Analysts Are Hot #podcast

Matt Moore
 

Hello,

Alan is the founder of industry analyst firm Deep Analysis and author
of Amazon bestseller “Practical Artificial Intelligence - An
Enterprise Playbook” - Alan has over 20 years experience as an adviser
to tech firms and enterprises - focusing on emerging technology trends
in Information Management.

We talk about the skills needs to effectively use tools such as
artificial intelligence and automation.

Podbean: https://infoinnouts.podbean.com/e/alan

Subscribe to the podcast feed here.
Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/information-innovation-uts/id1503109295
Google: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkLnBvZGJlYW4uY29tL2luZm9pbm5vdXRzL2ZlZWQueG1s
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0HIr6BG7lOhphcSyarTSTu

Regards,

--
Matt Moore
M. +61 (0) 423 784 504
matt@...


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

John Lewis
 

This has been my Go-To book for emotions: "Emotions and Life"
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1557989494

There are lots of theories and models provided, international comparisons, cognitive connections, and some fundamental lists after removing duplicates and variations by intensity.

After reviewing these models, I show where emotions align with the story thinking pattern, and how this helps knowledge sharing, presented recently for the Knowledge Management Institute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9JspKPRHls

I have done some other work on emotions and cognition, found in my earlier book, The Explanation Age:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1452811067

This work is more detailed and looks at the intersection of emotional needs (based on Human Givens, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CLCZSHU), emotions (how we feel), sentiments (how we feel about), and cognitive reasons based on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521657296). I recently taught a text analytics class based on this research and the growing need for Explainable AI (XAI).

I will be covering some of this material at the upcoming KMWorld conference. Hope to see you there, virtually.

John Lewis, Ed.D.
ExplanationAge.com

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 4:38 PM Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:

Murray –

 

When people are uneasy their fear will prevent (discourage) them from taking risks – and both change and learning are risks.  It might be helpful to think of it this way.  People that are in college are there to learn so they’re predisposed to trying to learn.  So they might take the risk to learning 5 out of 6 times.  Think of rolling a die and occasionally getting the student that doesn’t want to make it work. (Maybe 1:6) However, pressured into change they don’t want to make and feeling like they have less control of their lives they have less capacity to take the leap of learning.  Reduce your ratio from 5:6 to 1:3 because of the pressures of fear.  Some will still engage and learn but fewer will now that it’s additional risk they don’t have to take.

 

A lot of this is courage, fear tolerance, and self-efficacy.  The more self-efficacious you believe you are the less external circumstances will influence you (but they still do to some degree.)

 

It’s not so much that we’re missing emotions as we have too much fear for people’s naturally occurring courage to overcome reliably.

 

In your case, call out the elephant in the room and ask everyone what ideas they have to make it better.  Make them believe they have a greater degree of control than they currently believe (whether they do or not has experimentally been proven to be irrelevant.)  If you talk about COVID-19, the fear, the transition to virtual learning, etc., you’ll instantly make their emotions more normal and therefore safer.

 

As for motivators, there are people who are naturally curious and will want to learn.  For folks who are motivated differently the question becomes how we can connect the desired behavior (learning) with their intrinsically important activity.

 

I hope that helps.

 

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

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Want to be confident about your change management efforts?  https://ConfidentChangeManagement.com

Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it (for free)

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Murray Jennex via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 3:31 PM
To: matt@...; main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM

 

Matt, you make the statement below about the huge consumption of business books and seminars and it struck me that just because people read them, it doesn't mean they can take that knowledge and put it into action.  We have had to do remote teaching during covid and I am surprised at how little people will read and turn it into action.  My students meet with me weekly via zoom, I present material, I go over it and show them how to use it, but I'm finding that few use it near as well as when this is done in a class.  I'm kind of surprised at this as unlike regular class, I post a zoom recording of what we do, and yet few are using it.  As an author as well as a teacher I like to think that by making knowledge available they will be able to use it.  I suspect there must be an emotional aspect to hearing material in person that is not being recognized.  I do know I can make good eye contact in person and get a read on what they think about the material that I can't do over zoom.  I also suspect this is true about simply reading material from a business book.  I've been following the conversation about and don't think much about safe spaces and such as I do this with students by pointing out that the safest space they will have is the classroom when compared to a work environment, doesn't seem to matter.  Making it stressful doesn't help either.  I'm seeing less than 30% engagement (probably about 20-25%).  So my bottom line questions are: (with respect to knowledge sharing and getting people to put knowledge in action)

 

what emotions are we missing?

how do we read/sense them?

how do we address these emotions and turn them into motivators?

 

what I'm seeing now is a focus on life and doing the daily things and while people want to change and improve by using knowledge, they either don't have the energy or time......murray jennex

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore <matt@...>
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2020 11:12 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM - Fear

 Tom,

 

I mostly agree with the points you make - and I think that they can be applied to not just psychological safety but to many management techniques.

 

Most organisations and their managers say they want to high-performing but they don’t take the actions necessary to be high-performing. As you say, mediocrity is enough. Don’t rock the boat.

 

I’d also say that teams can do all the things that “high-performing teams” are supposed to do and still fail. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can do all the things that the HBR articles and business books tell you to do and still wind up broke.

I’m not saying this to ignore the importance of personal responsibility or the need for personal learning & improvement.

 

I remain struck by the huge consumption of business books and articles and executive seminar series, training programs etc and the available data which suggests that most people don’t like their jobs or think much of their managers.

 

In 2001, Gallup found that 30% of US workers surveyed were engaged. In 2020, Gallup found that 31% of workers were engaged.

 

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result - what does that say about our business culture? And what does it say about our collective and individual abilities to cross The Knowing Doing Gap?

Regards,

Matt Moore

+61 423 784 504



On Oct 17, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:45 AM, Matt Moore wrote:

However, if creating a psychologically safe organisation was the most important thing for organisational success, there would be more of them.

Maybe. OTOH, most organizations - the miracle of organizations, actually - can get by on mediocrity. Pull employees from the middle of the bell curve, put them into pre-configured jobs, give them a bit a training, and voila - cars get designed and built. So use a bit of stick as needed - can’t hurt anything.

But not all organizations can get away with that. Some need truly high-performing individuals who work on high-performing teams. For these teams, psychological safety is central, as Google discovered in their research on high performing teams.
https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it 

This is, in an odd sort of way, analogous to why most organizations don’t do After Action Learning, even though the military has shown it to be very effective in improving processes and reducing risk. If it’s so effective, why don’t all companies use it? Simple: no one dies in companies in the course of doing their jobs (well, usually). That, coupled with the political risk/fear of calling out your superior for a bad plan of action - which is a central aspect of AAL work - means that the cultural toll of doing it is greater than the perceived potential benefit (incremental process improvement). Just sayin’.
--
-Tom
--

Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Robert L. Bogue
 

Murray –

 

When people are uneasy their fear will prevent (discourage) them from taking risks – and both change and learning are risks.  It might be helpful to think of it this way.  People that are in college are there to learn so they’re predisposed to trying to learn.  So they might take the risk to learning 5 out of 6 times.  Think of rolling a die and occasionally getting the student that doesn’t want to make it work. (Maybe 1:6) However, pressured into change they don’t want to make and feeling like they have less control of their lives they have less capacity to take the leap of learning.  Reduce your ratio from 5:6 to 1:3 because of the pressures of fear.  Some will still engage and learn but fewer will now that it’s additional risk they don’t have to take.

 

A lot of this is courage, fear tolerance, and self-efficacy.  The more self-efficacious you believe you are the less external circumstances will influence you (but they still do to some degree.)

 

It’s not so much that we’re missing emotions as we have too much fear for people’s naturally occurring courage to overcome reliably.

 

In your case, call out the elephant in the room and ask everyone what ideas they have to make it better.  Make them believe they have a greater degree of control than they currently believe (whether they do or not has experimentally been proven to be irrelevant.)  If you talk about COVID-19, the fear, the transition to virtual learning, etc., you’ll instantly make their emotions more normal and therefore safer.

 

As for motivators, there are people who are naturally curious and will want to learn.  For folks who are motivated differently the question becomes how we can connect the desired behavior (learning) with their intrinsically important activity.

 

I hope that helps.

 

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

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

Want to be confident about your change management efforts?  https://ConfidentChangeManagement.com

Are you burned out?  https://ExtinguishBurnout.com can help you get out of it (for free)

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Murray Jennex via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 3:31 PM
To: matt@...; main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM

 

Matt, you make the statement below about the huge consumption of business books and seminars and it struck me that just because people read them, it doesn't mean they can take that knowledge and put it into action.  We have had to do remote teaching during covid and I am surprised at how little people will read and turn it into action.  My students meet with me weekly via zoom, I present material, I go over it and show them how to use it, but I'm finding that few use it near as well as when this is done in a class.  I'm kind of surprised at this as unlike regular class, I post a zoom recording of what we do, and yet few are using it.  As an author as well as a teacher I like to think that by making knowledge available they will be able to use it.  I suspect there must be an emotional aspect to hearing material in person that is not being recognized.  I do know I can make good eye contact in person and get a read on what they think about the material that I can't do over zoom.  I also suspect this is true about simply reading material from a business book.  I've been following the conversation about and don't think much about safe spaces and such as I do this with students by pointing out that the safest space they will have is the classroom when compared to a work environment, doesn't seem to matter.  Making it stressful doesn't help either.  I'm seeing less than 30% engagement (probably about 20-25%).  So my bottom line questions are: (with respect to knowledge sharing and getting people to put knowledge in action)

 

what emotions are we missing?

how do we read/sense them?

how do we address these emotions and turn them into motivators?

 

what I'm seeing now is a focus on life and doing the daily things and while people want to change and improve by using knowledge, they either don't have the energy or time......murray jennex

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore <matt@...>
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2020 11:12 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM - Fear

 Tom,

 

I mostly agree with the points you make - and I think that they can be applied to not just psychological safety but to many management techniques.

 

Most organisations and their managers say they want to high-performing but they don’t take the actions necessary to be high-performing. As you say, mediocrity is enough. Don’t rock the boat.

 

I’d also say that teams can do all the things that “high-performing teams” are supposed to do and still fail. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can do all the things that the HBR articles and business books tell you to do and still wind up broke.

I’m not saying this to ignore the importance of personal responsibility or the need for personal learning & improvement.

 

I remain struck by the huge consumption of business books and articles and executive seminar series, training programs etc and the available data which suggests that most people don’t like their jobs or think much of their managers.

 

In 2001, Gallup found that 30% of US workers surveyed were engaged. In 2020, Gallup found that 31% of workers were engaged.

 

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result - what does that say about our business culture? And what does it say about our collective and individual abilities to cross The Knowing Doing Gap?

Regards,

Matt Moore

+61 423 784 504



On Oct 17, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:45 AM, Matt Moore wrote:

However, if creating a psychologically safe organisation was the most important thing for organisational success, there would be more of them.

Maybe. OTOH, most organizations - the miracle of organizations, actually - can get by on mediocrity. Pull employees from the middle of the bell curve, put them into pre-configured jobs, give them a bit a training, and voila - cars get designed and built. So use a bit of stick as needed - can’t hurt anything.

But not all organizations can get away with that. Some need truly high-performing individuals who work on high-performing teams. For these teams, psychological safety is central, as Google discovered in their research on high performing teams.
https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it 

This is, in an odd sort of way, analogous to why most organizations don’t do After Action Learning, even though the military has shown it to be very effective in improving processes and reducing risk. If it’s so effective, why don’t all companies use it? Simple: no one dies in companies in the course of doing their jobs (well, usually). That, coupled with the political risk/fear of calling out your superior for a bad plan of action - which is a central aspect of AAL work - means that the cultural toll of doing it is greater than the perceived potential benefit (incremental process improvement). Just sayin’.
--
-Tom
--

Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts


Re: How are we managing the knowledge shared in this group? #curation #expertise-location #profiles

Stan Garfield
 
Edited

Thanks for your reply, Valdis.

In this community, here a few ways to locate people who know about a particular topic:
  1. Search the messages for the topic, and then take note of which members share the most useful information in their posts and replies.
  2. Search the database of previous monthly calls to see who has presented on the topic.
  3. Search the messages for the topic, and take note of the names of others mentioned in the discussions, usually involving links to their work.
  4. Post a query: "Who knows about this topic?" or "Who can help me with this need/situation?" The replies will include both people declaring themselves able to help, and the names of other recommended individuals.
I have also been working to answer this question through my Profiles in Knowledge series. Each profile lists the specialties of the thought leader being profiled, and includes links to posts and presentations made in this community. One example is the profile I wrote about Valdis. I am currently working on the 61st article in the series.

I encourage other members to reply with their thoughts. What methods do you use to locate expertise?


Re: How are we managing the knowledge shared in this group? #curation #expertise-location #profiles

Valdis Krebs
 
Edited

Would also be very useful to know "Who to go to for a topic".  Search and links are fine, but you often need to inquire further to match your context. "OK, I found X on Google, and a few links to it -- but what I found does not exactly match my needs/situation.  Wish I had someone to talk to about X and it's use/implementation quirks." Facts/Data/Info are fine, but I am searching knowledge/experience/wisdom -- which are housed in humans not hard drives!!!


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Murray Jennex
 

Matt, you make the statement below about the huge consumption of business books and seminars and it struck me that just because people read them, it doesn't mean they can take that knowledge and put it into action.  We have had to do remote teaching during covid and I am surprised at how little people will read and turn it into action.  My students meet with me weekly via zoom, I present material, I go over it and show them how to use it, but I'm finding that few use it near as well as when this is done in a class.  I'm kind of surprised at this as unlike regular class, I post a zoom recording of what we do, and yet few are using it.  As an author as well as a teacher I like to think that by making knowledge available they will be able to use it.  I suspect there must be an emotional aspect to hearing material in person that is not being recognized.  I do know I can make good eye contact in person and get a read on what they think about the material that I can't do over zoom.  I also suspect this is true about simply reading material from a business book.  I've been following the conversation about and don't think much about safe spaces and such as I do this with students by pointing out that the safest space they will have is the classroom when compared to a work environment, doesn't seem to matter.  Making it stressful doesn't help either.  I'm seeing less than 30% engagement (probably about 20-25%).  So my bottom line questions are: (with respect to knowledge sharing and getting people to put knowledge in action)

what emotions are we missing?
how do we read/sense them?
how do we address these emotions and turn them into motivators?

what I'm seeing now is a focus on life and doing the daily things and while people want to change and improve by using knowledge, they either don't have the energy or time......murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore <matt@...>
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2020 11:12 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Emotions & KM - Fear

 Tom,

I mostly agree with the points you make - and I think that they can be applied to not just psychological safety but to many management techniques.

Most organisations and their managers say they want to high-performing but they don’t take the actions necessary to be high-performing. As you say, mediocrity is enough. Don’t rock the boat.

I’d also say that teams can do all the things that “high-performing teams” are supposed to do and still fail. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can do all the things that the HBR articles and business books tell you to do and still wind up broke.

I’m not saying this to ignore the importance of personal responsibility or the need for personal learning & improvement.

I remain struck by the huge consumption of business books and articles and executive seminar series, training programs etc and the available data which suggests that most people don’t like their jobs or think much of their managers.

In 2001, Gallup found that 30% of US workers surveyed were engaged. In 2020, Gallup found that 31% of workers were engaged.

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result - what does that say about our business culture? And what does it say about our collective and individual abilities to cross The Knowing Doing Gap?

Regards,

Matt Moore
+61 423 784 504

On Oct 17, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:


[Edited Message Follows]
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:45 AM, Matt Moore wrote:
However, if creating a psychologically safe organisation was the most important thing for organisational success, there would be more of them.
Maybe. OTOH, most organizations - the miracle of organizations, actually - can get by on mediocrity. Pull employees from the middle of the bell curve, put them into pre-configured jobs, give them a bit a training, and voila - cars get designed and built. So use a bit of stick as needed - can’t hurt anything.

But not all organizations can get away with that. Some need truly high-performing individuals who work on high-performing teams. For these teams, psychological safety is central, as Google discovered in their research on high performing teams.
https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it 

This is, in an odd sort of way, analogous to why most organizations don’t do After Action Learning, even though the military has shown it to be very effective in improving processes and reducing risk. If it’s so effective, why don’t all companies use it? Simple: no one dies in companies in the course of doing their jobs (well, usually). That, coupled with the political risk/fear of calling out your superior for a bad plan of action - which is a central aspect of AAL work - means that the cultural toll of doing it is greater than the perceived potential benefit (incremental process improvement). Just sayin’.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts


Re: Emotions & KM #emotions

Matt Moore
 

Tom,

I mostly agree with the points you make - and I think that they can be applied to not just psychological safety but to many management techniques.

Most organisations and their managers say they want to high-performing but they don’t take the actions necessary to be high-performing. As you say, mediocrity is enough. Don’t rock the boat.

I’d also say that teams can do all the things that “high-performing teams” are supposed to do and still fail. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can do all the things that the HBR articles and business books tell you to do and still wind up broke.

I’m not saying this to ignore the importance of personal responsibility or the need for personal learning & improvement.

I remain struck by the huge consumption of business books and articles and executive seminar series, training programs etc and the available data which suggests that most people don’t like their jobs or think much of their managers.

In 2001, Gallup found that 30% of US workers surveyed were engaged. In 2020, Gallup found that 31% of workers were engaged.

If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result - what does that say about our business culture? And what does it say about our collective and individual abilities to cross The Knowing Doing Gap?

Regards,

Matt Moore
+61 423 784 504

On Oct 17, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:45 AM, Matt Moore wrote:
However, if creating a psychologically safe organisation was the most important thing for organisational success, there would be more of them.
Maybe. OTOH, most organizations - the miracle of organizations, actually - can get by on mediocrity. Pull employees from the middle of the bell curve, put them into pre-configured jobs, give them a bit a training, and voila - cars get designed and built. So use a bit of stick as needed - can’t hurt anything.

But not all organizations can get away with that. Some need truly high-performing individuals who work on high-performing teams. For these teams, psychological safety is central, as Google discovered in their research on high performing teams.
https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it 

This is, in an odd sort of way, analogous to why most organizations don’t do After Action Learning, even though the military has shown it to be very effective in improving processes and reducing risk. If it’s so effective, why don’t all companies use it? Simple: no one dies in companies in the course of doing their jobs (well, usually). That, coupled with the political risk/fear of calling out your superior for a bad plan of action - which is a central aspect of AAL work - means that the cultural toll of doing it is greater than the perceived potential benefit (incremental process improvement). Just sayin’.
--
-Tom
--

Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts

1781 - 1800 of 9974