|
Interesting, Stephen. I wasn’t thinking about from the standpoint of meetings and zoom calls - but that in itself presents another interesting use case. And there sure are a lot of calls recorded taking up space on servers that I bet are never accessed again.
What I was imagining was a library of “how to” videos, perhaps for field workers for example. So you’re out there repairing a piece of equipment in a chip fab, let’s say, and you video the repair, which is uploaded to a searchable video repository based on the make and model of the equipment, the type of repair, etc. The next time someone needs to fix that problem on that same type of equipment, they can “look over your shoulder” via the video and learn how to do it, saving time as well as expense of screw ups. Of course, someone would have to vet the videos and determine which ones were using the approved procedure and which ones weren’t.
Something like that, I would think, would be workable. The challenge has always been, as you say, finding the bit at 42:55 that is relevant to the specific question someone in the field has - figuring out which video it’s in is hard enough; then navigating quickly to the right bit - next to impossible thus far.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Nice! I hadn't heard of either of those tools before, I'll check
them out.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 21/05/2021 9:00 am, Jay Kreshel
wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
@stephen we use Gong pretty effectively for this purpose. Or does
a pretty good job of transcribing and assigning names. It brings
forth the calls to action and other key AI driven data. We also
tried Avoma at one point.
Jay.
On May 20, 2021, at 3:53 PM,
Stephen Bounds <km@...>
wrote:
Interesting Tom,
I actually think it is still likely to be a failure
from an enterprise point of view, because if you
were to capture the majority of meetings you are
likely to get lots of:
- irrelevant discussion
- tasking ("so we've agreed that X will do Y and
come back by Z")
- acronyms and implied knowledge about past events
Additionally:
- meeting contexts will look pretty identical
(either a non-descript meeting table or Zoom grid)
and
- emotions tend to be pretty guarded
So I feel the pickings of the AI in this context will
be slim. On the other hand, I'm sure the system will
be a boon for the stock video and content creator
market, since if you're looking for a quick way to
find (context free) "cat runs into chair while chasing
toy mouse" videos, it will have you covered 😁
What would be much more interesting to me is a
system that fully and accurately transcribes videos,
including assigning names to speakers and
descriptions of video actions on screen. That's
because the biggest drawback of videos is that you
have to watch the damn things. If you could instead
skim through text to find the bit at 42:55 where you
show me exactly how to safely clear a jammed lathe,
that would be a valuable knowledge
tool.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 21/05/2021 2:01 am,
Curtis A. Conley wrote:
Thanks for sharing. Seems like a
natural evolution of video-conferencing, given
where it's at today. Many of the standard
VC/streaming apps have built in auto-captioning
and transcription capabilities, and if you bundle
that in with all of the other asynchronous tools
we're using to message and share knowledge, that
could lead to a lot of interesting applications in
the KM space.
Back in the early days of KM, big 4
consulting firms (I think there were six
back then) saw the potential of KM and
started experimenting with various tools and
approaches. And it made sense for them to
get onboard early: their assets were purely
knowledge-based and went down the elevator
every night.
Back in 1989, Andersen Consulting
hired AI guru Roger Schank and gave him
$30million to play with and continue his
research (he was at Stanford) hoping for
some breakthroughs they could apply to their
business.
One KM-related project he worked on involved
conducting and videoing knowledge
elicitation interviews with experts. The
thought was that if we could simply
interview people and video it all, it would
capture knowledge in a way that could be
then inventoried, tagged and searched for
future retrieval and re-use. I don’t know
how much he spent on it, but word was it was
in the millions.
In any case, that didn’t work. When I
learned about this effort I was at IBM, and
I knew it wouldn’t work. We didn’t have the
tools to cope with vast amounts of
unstructured data, even when it was in text
format, much less video format.
But maybe now that is about to
change. Some MIT alums are building a
startup called Netra around an AI engine
that is supposed to be able to parse video
content and categorize it automagically.
Might be a good one to watch. Who knows?
Maybe Schank will be vindicated after all,
and video knowledge elicitations will become
a thing again.
Now MIT
alumnus-founded Netra is using artificial
intelligence to improve video analysis at
scale. The company’s system can identify
activities, objects, emotions, locations,
and more to organize and provide context
to videos in new ways.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short
Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Jay Kreshel
@stephen we use Gong pretty effectively for this purpose. Or does a pretty good job of transcribing and assigning names. It brings forth the calls to action and other key AI driven data. We also tried Avoma at one point.
On May 20, 2021, at 3:53 PM, Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:
Interesting Tom,
I actually think it is still likely to be a failure from an
enterprise point of view, because if you were to capture the
majority of meetings you are likely to get lots of:
- irrelevant discussion
- tasking ("so we've agreed that X will do Y and come back by
Z")
- acronyms and implied knowledge about past events
Additionally:
- meeting contexts will look pretty identical (either a
non-descript meeting table or Zoom grid) and
- emotions tend to be pretty guarded
So I feel the pickings of the AI in this context will be slim. On
the other hand, I'm sure the system will be a boon for the stock
video and content creator market, since if you're looking for a
quick way to find (context free) "cat runs into chair while chasing
toy mouse" videos, it will have you covered 😁
What would be much more interesting to me is a system that fully
and accurately transcribes videos, including assigning names to
speakers and descriptions of video actions on screen. That's
because the biggest drawback of videos is that you have to watch
the damn things. If you could instead skim through text to find
the bit at 42:55 where you show me exactly how to safely clear a
jammed lathe, that would be a valuable knowledge
tool.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 21/05/2021 2:01 am, Curtis A. Conley
wrote:
Thanks for sharing. Seems like a natural evolution
of video-conferencing, given where it's at today. Many of the
standard VC/streaming apps have built in auto-captioning and
transcription capabilities, and if you bundle that in with all
of the other asynchronous tools we're using to message and share
knowledge, that could lead to a lot of interesting applications
in the KM space.
Back in the early days of KM, big 4 consulting
firms (I think there were six back then) saw the potential
of KM and started experimenting with various tools and
approaches. And it made sense for them to get onboard
early: their assets were purely knowledge-based and went
down the elevator every night.
Back in 1989, Andersen Consulting hired AI guru
Roger Schank and gave him $30million to play with and
continue his research (he was at Stanford) hoping for some
breakthroughs they could apply to their business.
One KM-related project he worked on involved conducting
and videoing knowledge elicitation interviews with
experts. The thought was that if we could simply interview
people and video it all, it would capture knowledge in a
way that could be then inventoried, tagged and searched
for future retrieval and re-use. I don’t know how much he
spent on it, but word was it was in the millions.
In any case, that didn’t work. When I learned about
this effort I was at IBM, and I knew it wouldn’t work. We
didn’t have the tools to cope with vast amounts of
unstructured data, even when it was in text format, much
less video format.
But maybe now that is about to change. Some MIT
alums are building a startup called Netra around an AI
engine that is supposed to be able to parse video content
and categorize it automagically. Might be a good one to
watch. Who knows? Maybe Schank will be vindicated after
all, and video knowledge elicitations will become a thing
again.
Now MIT
alumnus-founded Netra is using artificial intelligence
to improve video analysis at scale. The company’s system
can identify activities, objects, emotions, locations,
and more to organize and provide context to videos in
new ways.
--
-Tom
--
Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Interesting Tom,
I actually think it is still likely to be a failure from an
enterprise point of view, because if you were to capture the
majority of meetings you are likely to get lots of:
- irrelevant discussion
- tasking ("so we've agreed that X will do Y and come back by
Z")
- acronyms and implied knowledge about past events
Additionally:
- meeting contexts will look pretty identical (either a
non-descript meeting table or Zoom grid) and
- emotions tend to be pretty guarded
So I feel the pickings of the AI in this context will be slim. On
the other hand, I'm sure the system will be a boon for the stock
video and content creator market, since if you're looking for a
quick way to find (context free) "cat runs into chair while chasing
toy mouse" videos, it will have you covered 😁
What would be much more interesting to me is a system that fully
and accurately transcribes videos, including assigning names to
speakers and descriptions of video actions on screen. That's
because the biggest drawback of videos is that you have to watch
the damn things. If you could instead skim through text to find
the bit at 42:55 where you show me exactly how to safely clear a
jammed lathe, that would be a valuable knowledge
tool.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 21/05/2021 2:01 am, Curtis A. Conley
wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for sharing. Seems like a natural evolution
of video-conferencing, given where it's at today. Many of the
standard VC/streaming apps have built in auto-captioning and
transcription capabilities, and if you bundle that in with all
of the other asynchronous tools we're using to message and share
knowledge, that could lead to a lot of interesting applications
in the KM space.
Back in the early days of KM, big 4 consulting
firms (I think there were six back then) saw the potential
of KM and started experimenting with various tools and
approaches. And it made sense for them to get onboard
early: their assets were purely knowledge-based and went
down the elevator every night.
Back in 1989, Andersen Consulting hired AI guru
Roger Schank and gave him $30million to play with and
continue his research (he was at Stanford) hoping for some
breakthroughs they could apply to their business.
One KM-related project he worked on involved conducting
and videoing knowledge elicitation interviews with
experts. The thought was that if we could simply interview
people and video it all, it would capture knowledge in a
way that could be then inventoried, tagged and searched
for future retrieval and re-use. I don’t know how much he
spent on it, but word was it was in the millions.
In any case, that didn’t work. When I learned about
this effort I was at IBM, and I knew it wouldn’t work. We
didn’t have the tools to cope with vast amounts of
unstructured data, even when it was in text format, much
less video format.
But maybe now that is about to change. Some MIT
alums are building a startup called Netra around an AI
engine that is supposed to be able to parse video content
and categorize it automagically. Might be a good one to
watch. Who knows? Maybe Schank will be vindicated after
all, and video knowledge elicitations will become a thing
again.
Now MIT
alumnus-founded Netra is using artificial intelligence
to improve video analysis at scale. The company’s system
can identify activities, objects, emotions, locations,
and more to organize and provide context to videos in
new ways.
--
-Tom
--
Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Jan Hutter
@Patrick: you ask about usage of Wardley maps in KM. I personally don't have any experience with that approach nor did I watch any of those videos myself but there is a whole Youtube Channel dedicated to Wardley mapping here. One particular video is about Wardley Mapping and DDD (Domain-Driven Design). While DDD is an approach to develop domain-heavy software systems, it has a lot of overlap with challenges in the knowledge management discipline.
Jan
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:26 AM Patrick Lambe < plambe@...> wrote: Has anyone here used Wardley maps in this kind of KM context? I suspect they would be useful in zeroing in on critical KM capabilities in relation to product and service deliverables. And the technique was originally developed in the context of startups/ high tech companies.
The challenge in this kind of situation is lack of deep understanding of how KM ecosystems work among the key stakeholders and so they might end up identifying KM initiatives that look like they might be useful in principle, but end up feeling like housekeeping measures and eventually run out of supportive steam. Wardley maps are meant to help teams dig into and zero in on critical capabilities in the value chain. I suspect the technique would be useful but haven’t seen explicit examples in a KM context. Anyone?
P
On 20 May 2021, at 2:53 PM, Stephen Bounds < km@...> wrote:
Hi Jay, Sounds like you have a perfect case for undertaking a RROI
(relative return on investment) evaluation. From what you have said, you've already identified three key
metrics to target, each of which is a clear proxy for an ultimate
business goal:
- Increased customer retention (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Higher sales conversion rate (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Decreased onboarding time for sales team (proxy metric for
decreased cost of sales)
To complete an RROI evaluation, the basic stages are:
- Identify ultimate goals and create a method for valuing
goal outcomes. This can be skipped, since it looks like
you have a direct revenue goal. Some organisations (eg
governments) need to assign a nominal dollar value another way,
perhaps by looking at calculating lost client productivity.
- Identify proximate goals and options to target them. You
have already identified the proximate goals, so the next step is
to brainstorm a range of ways to "shift the needle".
- Model impact of options on proximate goals. In other
words, what rate of change in proximate goals are you targeting
and how much would it cost to implement the option you've
identified?
- Model change in ultimate goals based on change in proximate
goals. For example, if your average retained customer
pays $1000 / month, a 1% increase in retention on 1000 new
customers annually is worth $120,000 a year.
- Compare benefits to costs to find the RROI of each
initiative. This is simply dividing the benefit achieved
by the cost, similar to a conventional cost-benefit analysis.
Use this rank to recommend the highest benefit:cost ratio first!
There's a fully worked example on page 5 of my KM4Dev paper about
RROI, which is freely
available online.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 20/05/2021 11:46 am, Jay Kreshel
wrote:
Thanks for the reply. My boss EVP in Customer
Success works on the executive staff. His discussions with the
head of Marketing and Head of Sales. Their objectives are
mostly around:
Decreasing the amount of time our customers take to get value out of the application. Minimizing the misunderstandings for the sales team Increasing customer retention. If we can get the Customer Success team to know all of the use cases around the products, they can share the whole value around the solution, thus increasing retention. Increasing the ramp time for sales, CS. We will increase the pace of hiring and will need to help them to know about our product & industry in as a short period of time as possible.
We have been working for the past few months on new
product releases and enablement for our customer-facing
teams. We have technology, software, processes, &
people that we have used to "appropriately" spread
knowledge to the audiences, But, to your point, we have
not been targeted in our approach. And we have not picked
that key "Pain Point" that we should start with.
Any thoughts as to which would be the highest reward
with ease of implementation? to get that Bang for our
early buck?
Jay.
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming
from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a
complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in
terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand
where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might
be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the
most variance in performance among people doing similar
types of work? Which processes have high variance of
outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of
resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place
to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and
where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach
check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and
now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an
accelerator and via referrals). Good luck.
--
-Tom
-- Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Dennis Pearce
As you know, back on May 7 some of us participated in a virtual discussion on "Working Out Loud" (WOL). As a reminder, you can find that recording here - https://lnkd.in/gUqzFWzWOL is a rich and complex concept. It involves both working openly and narrating your work. It is both a mindset and an activity. Some people mistake it for sharing or collaborating, but it's not really either of those (see this post - https://lnkd.in/gN8Q2eK ) .Please join us June 9 at 10am ET for this next discussion as we use Gurteen's Knowledge Cafe approach to explore the question "Is implementing WOL limited by the surrounding environment and culture, and if so, why?As an effort to practice "work out loud", here's the planning document that a group of us put into this session:http://bit.ly/WOLCPREPAll the details are here:https://lnkd.in/g-MJx4y
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing. Seems like a natural evolution of video-conferencing, given where it's at today. Many of the standard VC/streaming apps have built in auto-captioning and transcription capabilities, and if you bundle that in with all of the other asynchronous tools we're using to message and share knowledge, that could lead to a lot of interesting applications in the KM space.
Back in the early days of KM, big 4 consulting firms (I think there were six back then) saw the potential of KM and started experimenting with various tools and approaches. And it made sense for them to get onboard early: their assets were purely knowledge-based and went down the elevator every night.
Back in 1989, Andersen Consulting hired AI guru Roger Schank and gave him $30million to play with and continue his research (he was at Stanford) hoping for some breakthroughs they could apply to their business.
One KM-related project he worked on involved conducting and videoing knowledge elicitation interviews with experts. The thought was that if we could simply interview people and video it all, it would capture knowledge in a way that could be then inventoried, tagged and searched for future retrieval and re-use. I don’t know how much he spent on it, but word was it was in the millions.
In any case, that didn’t work. When I learned about this effort I was at IBM, and I knew it wouldn’t work. We didn’t have the tools to cope with vast amounts of unstructured data, even when it was in text format, much less video format.
But maybe now that is about to change. Some MIT alums are building a startup called Netra around an AI engine that is supposed to be able to parse video content and categorize it automagically. Might be a good one to watch. Who knows? Maybe Schank will be vindicated after all, and video knowledge elicitations will become a thing again.
Now MIT alumnus-founded Netra is using artificial intelligence to improve video analysis at scale. The company’s system can identify activities, objects, emotions, locations, and more to organize and provide context to videos in new ways.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Back in the early days of KM, big 4 consulting firms (I think there were six back then) saw the potential of KM and started experimenting with various tools and approaches. And it made sense for them to get onboard early: their assets were purely knowledge-based and went down the elevator every night.
Back in 1989, Andersen Consulting hired AI guru Roger Schank and gave him $30million to play with and continue his research (he was at Stanford) hoping for some breakthroughs they could apply to their business.
One KM-related project he worked on involved conducting and videoing knowledge elicitation interviews with experts. The thought was that if we could simply interview people and video it all, it would capture knowledge in a way that could be then inventoried, tagged and searched for future retrieval and re-use. I don’t know how much he spent on it, but word was it was in the millions.
In any case, that didn’t work. When I learned about this effort I was at IBM, and I knew it wouldn’t work. We didn’t have the tools to cope with vast amounts of unstructured data, even when it was in text format, much less video format.
But maybe now that is about to change. Some MIT alums are building a startup called Netra around an AI engine that is supposed to be able to parse video content and categorize it automagically. Might be a good one to watch. Who knows? Maybe Schank will be vindicated after all, and video knowledge elicitations will become a thing again.
Now MIT alumnus-founded Netra is using artificial intelligence to improve video analysis at scale. The company’s system can identify activities, objects, emotions, locations, and more to organize and provide context to videos in new ways.
--
-Tom --
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Jay Kreshel
Thanks, @Tim Powell for the response. Really appreciate it.
I completely agree with oy on the "Why before the What". I tend to try to move too quickly and sometimes forgo that valuable information. And then, it bites me in the butt after the fact.
For both you and @Stephen Bounds, as I continue to read your guidance... I am not sure that ROI is the critical piece here. The ASK has been made by the executive staff. They came TO ME with the problem to solve. Yes, I still need to represent it, but I do not think that it becomes the pivotal point. I am not sure what is that Pivotal / Critical point, but I don't think that it will be the ROI. (And yes I do now realize that I am going against what my original ask was about).
Or am I UNDER valuing its impact?
Jay.
Hi Jay,
I would say that in general this is a good plan – and that you are also getting sound advice from others on this list, who are among the best and brightest in the knowledge field.
I’m not sure your list is intended to be in priority order, but if so, I’d put 7 (business case) where 2 is now. You need to address the WHY before the WHAT. If you understand the
knowledge value proposition from the top down, you’ll be way ahead of the many organizations who try to figure this out after the fact.
Also I would explicitly address enterprise
strategies, objectives, and goals that knowledge will directly support and enhance – as Steven has described. “What does it do for us?” is the most important question senior leadership will have – and you need to have thought it through thoroughly and
convincingly.
Be sure you use the metrics senior leaders already use -- not ad hoc metrics peculiar to knowledge. For example, basic net present value ROI, which they will “get.” I attach a short article about this – and there’s much more in my book
The Value of Knowledge.
There’s also lots of content on the two sites linked below that may be helpful to you.
Good luck, and thanks for bringing in this group to share your challenges.
Cheers,
Tim
I have been asked to look into knowledge management for our company, a Hi-Tech start-up doing Artificial Intelligence for finance organizations.
I have been reading up on KM over the past week... sifting through the massive amount of articles, posts, and books.
I have come up with a plan to conquer my quest:
1.
Work with the executives to understand the value proposition for the km program
2.
Create a knowledge map of assets across the company & people
3.
Determine & Document how knowledge should flow: Document how knowledge is created, captured, organized, reviewed, shared, and used.
4.
Get buy-in and budget for the program
5.
List the core program Objectives
6.
Become smarter on knowledge management tools and approaches
7.
Create a business case with KM approaches, roles, budget, metrics, etc.
8.
Execute on each KM approach / program
FIRST, is my approach a good one?
SECOND: Can anyone direct me to previously created Business Plans, Value Proposition Slides, etc.,
that I can use to communicate with my executive staff?
THIRD: What other smaller Tech companies (hopefully in the Silicon Valley ) can I reference to mirror
my program after for a starting point.
Thanks again to Stan for the response to my LinkedIn Request.
Jay.
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Jay Kreshel
Thank you @Stephen Bounds. I appreciate the article and thoughts. I will review it further and give it a go. Per stage 3 or the RROI ( Identify proximate goals and options to target them), you elude to "brainstorming ways to 'shift the needle'. Do you mean identify different KM Approaches? Do you have favorites that provide visible wins in a short period of time? Ones that would solidify executive and participant support?
And then at a higher level... What will having the RROI get me? I can see that it would get me good favor with the CFO, showing that I am calculating value. I can see how it would help me focus on perhaps only ONE of the metrics, as I prioritize my efforts. Are there other wins that I am missing?
I want to just move on and start building stuff, but I realize that there are MANY middle steps that I need to do. This feels like one that would be valuable to me, but I need clarity on how it will help.
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:54 PM Stephen Bounds < km@...> wrote:
Hi Jay,
Sounds like you have a perfect case for undertaking a RROI
(relative return on investment) evaluation.
From what you have said, you've already identified three key
metrics to target, each of which is a clear proxy for an ultimate
business goal:
- Increased customer retention (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Higher sales conversion rate (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Decreased onboarding time for sales team (proxy metric for
decreased cost of sales)
To complete an RROI evaluation, the basic stages are:
- Identify ultimate goals and create a method for valuing
goal outcomes. This can be skipped, since it looks like
you have a direct revenue goal. Some organisations (eg
governments) need to assign a nominal dollar value another way,
perhaps by looking at calculating lost client productivity.
- Identify proximate goals and options to target them. You
have already identified the proximate goals, so the next step is
to brainstorm a range of ways to "shift the needle".
- Model impact of options on proximate goals. In other
words, what rate of change in proximate goals are you targeting
and how much would it cost to implement the option you've
identified?
- Model change in ultimate goals based on change in proximate
goals. For example, if your average retained customer
pays $1000 / month, a 1% increase in retention on 1000 new
customers annually is worth $120,000 a year.
- Compare benefits to costs to find the RROI of each
initiative. This is simply dividing the benefit achieved
by the cost, similar to a conventional cost-benefit analysis.
Use this rank to recommend the highest benefit:cost ratio first!
There's a fully worked example on page 5 of my KM4Dev paper about
RROI, which is freely
available online.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 20/05/2021 11:46 am, Jay Kreshel
wrote:
Thanks for the reply. My boss EVP in Customer
Success works on the executive staff. His discussions with the
head of Marketing and Head of Sales. Their objectives are
mostly around:
Decreasing the amount of time our customers take to get value out of the application. Minimizing the misunderstandings for the sales team Increasing customer retention. If we can get the Customer Success team to know all of the use cases around the products, they can share the whole value around the solution, thus increasing retention. Increasing the ramp time for sales, CS. We will increase the pace of hiring and will need to help them to know about our product & industry in as a short period of time as possible.
We have been working for the past few months on new
product releases and enablement for our customer-facing
teams. We have technology, software, processes, &
people that we have used to "appropriately" spread
knowledge to the audiences, But, to your point, we have
not been targeted in our approach. And we have not picked
that key "Pain Point" that we should start with.
Any thoughts as to which would be the highest reward
with ease of implementation? to get that Bang for our
early buck?
Jay.
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming
from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a
complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in
terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand
where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might
be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the
most variance in performance among people doing similar
types of work? Which processes have high variance of
outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of
resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place
to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and
where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach
check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and
now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an
accelerator and via referrals).
Good luck.
--
-Tom
--
Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
David Graffagna
Stephen,
As I have mentioned, we're pretty early in our journey so we don't yet have enough history or evidence to say if either our survey or liaison efforts are (or will be successful). Having said that, our survey is bi-annual and comprehensive (e.g., half a dozen focused questions and a couple on demographics). And, it's a directed effort … we send the survey to our broad audiences, give them a 10 days - 2 weeks to complete then close it and review the input.
On the liaison front, the intent is not to formally "track it" but rather to use those interchanges as a way to stay connected, anticipate new or enhanced needs, and to get out in front of any issues. Fortunately, our audiences have been receptive and we welcome them challenging us with "how can you add value to my area?" type questions. Obviously some areas (and some individuals) more easily see the value than other areas … it would worry me if that weren't true.
Best,
David
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Hi Jay,
I would say that in general this is a good plan – and that you are also getting sound advice from others on this list, who are among the best and brightest in the knowledge field.
I’m not sure your list is intended to be in priority order, but if so, I’d put 7 (business case) where 2 is now. You need to address the WHY before the WHAT. If you understand the
knowledge value proposition from the top down, you’ll be way ahead of the many organizations who try to figure this out after the fact.
Also I would explicitly address enterprise
strategies, objectives, and goals that knowledge will directly support and enhance – as Steven has described. “What does it do for us?” is the most important question senior leadership will have – and you need to have thought it through thoroughly and
convincingly.
Be sure you use the metrics senior leaders already use -- not ad hoc metrics peculiar to knowledge. For example, basic net present value ROI, which they will “get.” I attach a short article about this – and there’s much more in my book
The Value of Knowledge.
There’s also lots of content on the two sites linked below that may be helpful to you.
Good luck, and thanks for bringing in this group to share your challenges.
Cheers,
Tim
From:
<main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Jay Kreshel <jkreshel@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 at 8:44 PM
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: [SIKM] Guideace for building KM in Hi-tech startup
I have been asked to look into knowledge management for our company, a Hi-Tech start-up doing Artificial Intelligence for finance organizations.
I have been reading up on KM over the past week... sifting through the massive amount of articles, posts, and books.
I have come up with a plan to conquer my quest:
1.
Work with the executives to understand the value proposition for the km program
2.
Create a knowledge map of assets across the company & people
3.
Determine & Document how knowledge should flow: Document how knowledge is created, captured, organized, reviewed, shared, and used.
4.
Get buy-in and budget for the program
5.
List the core program Objectives
6.
Become smarter on knowledge management tools and approaches
7.
Create a business case with KM approaches, roles, budget, metrics, etc.
8.
Execute on each KM approach / program
FIRST, is my approach a good one?
SECOND: Can anyone direct me to previously created Business Plans, Value Proposition Slides, etc.,
that I can use to communicate with my executive staff?
THIRD: What other smaller Tech companies (hopefully in the Silicon Valley ) can I reference to mirror
my program after for a starting point.
Thanks again to Stan for the response to my LinkedIn Request.
Jay.
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Has anyone here used Wardley maps in this kind of KM context? I suspect they would be useful in zeroing in on critical KM capabilities in relation to product and service deliverables. And the technique was originally developed in the context of startups/ high tech companies.
The challenge in this kind of situation is lack of deep understanding of how KM ecosystems work among the key stakeholders and so they might end up identifying KM initiatives that look like they might be useful in principle, but end up feeling like housekeeping measures and eventually run out of supportive steam. Wardley maps are meant to help teams dig into and zero in on critical capabilities in the value chain. I suspect the technique would be useful but haven’t seen explicit examples in a KM context. Anyone?
On 20 May 2021, at 2:53 PM, Stephen Bounds < km@...> wrote:
Hi Jay, Sounds like you have a perfect case for undertaking a RROI
(relative return on investment) evaluation. From what you have said, you've already identified three key
metrics to target, each of which is a clear proxy for an ultimate
business goal:
- Increased customer retention (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Higher sales conversion rate (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Decreased onboarding time for sales team (proxy metric for
decreased cost of sales)
To complete an RROI evaluation, the basic stages are:
- Identify ultimate goals and create a method for valuing
goal outcomes. This can be skipped, since it looks like
you have a direct revenue goal. Some organisations (eg
governments) need to assign a nominal dollar value another way,
perhaps by looking at calculating lost client productivity.
- Identify proximate goals and options to target them. You
have already identified the proximate goals, so the next step is
to brainstorm a range of ways to "shift the needle".
- Model impact of options on proximate goals. In other
words, what rate of change in proximate goals are you targeting
and how much would it cost to implement the option you've
identified?
- Model change in ultimate goals based on change in proximate
goals. For example, if your average retained customer
pays $1000 / month, a 1% increase in retention on 1000 new
customers annually is worth $120,000 a year.
- Compare benefits to costs to find the RROI of each
initiative. This is simply dividing the benefit achieved
by the cost, similar to a conventional cost-benefit analysis.
Use this rank to recommend the highest benefit:cost ratio first!
There's a fully worked example on page 5 of my KM4Dev paper about
RROI, which is freely
available online.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 20/05/2021 11:46 am, Jay Kreshel
wrote:
Thanks for the reply. My boss EVP in Customer
Success works on the executive staff. His discussions with the
head of Marketing and Head of Sales. Their objectives are
mostly around:
Decreasing the amount of time our customers take to get value out of the application. Minimizing the misunderstandings for the sales team Increasing customer retention. If we can get the Customer Success team to know all of the use cases around the products, they can share the whole value around the solution, thus increasing retention. Increasing the ramp time for sales, CS. We will increase the pace of hiring and will need to help them to know about our product & industry in as a short period of time as possible.
We have been working for the past few months on new
product releases and enablement for our customer-facing
teams. We have technology, software, processes, &
people that we have used to "appropriately" spread
knowledge to the audiences, But, to your point, we have
not been targeted in our approach. And we have not picked
that key "Pain Point" that we should start with.
Any thoughts as to which would be the highest reward
with ease of implementation? to get that Bang for our
early buck?
Jay.
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming
from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a
complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in
terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand
where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might
be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the
most variance in performance among people doing similar
types of work? Which processes have high variance of
outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of
resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place
to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and
where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach
check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and
now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an
accelerator and via referrals). Good luck.
--
-Tom
-- Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Hi Jay,
Sounds like you have a perfect case for undertaking a RROI
(relative return on investment) evaluation.
From what you have said, you've already identified three key
metrics to target, each of which is a clear proxy for an ultimate
business goal:
- Increased customer retention (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Higher sales conversion rate (proxy metric for increased
revenue)
- Decreased onboarding time for sales team (proxy metric for
decreased cost of sales)
To complete an RROI evaluation, the basic stages are:
- Identify ultimate goals and create a method for valuing
goal outcomes. This can be skipped, since it looks like
you have a direct revenue goal. Some organisations (eg
governments) need to assign a nominal dollar value another way,
perhaps by looking at calculating lost client productivity.
- Identify proximate goals and options to target them. You
have already identified the proximate goals, so the next step is
to brainstorm a range of ways to "shift the needle".
- Model impact of options on proximate goals. In other
words, what rate of change in proximate goals are you targeting
and how much would it cost to implement the option you've
identified?
- Model change in ultimate goals based on change in proximate
goals. For example, if your average retained customer
pays $1000 / month, a 1% increase in retention on 1000 new
customers annually is worth $120,000 a year.
- Compare benefits to costs to find the RROI of each
initiative. This is simply dividing the benefit achieved
by the cost, similar to a conventional cost-benefit analysis.
Use this rank to recommend the highest benefit:cost ratio first!
There's a fully worked example on page 5 of my KM4Dev paper about
RROI, which is freely
available online.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 20/05/2021 11:46 am, Jay Kreshel
wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for the reply. My boss EVP in Customer
Success works on the executive staff. His discussions with the
head of Marketing and Head of Sales. Their objectives are
mostly around:
Decreasing the amount of time our customers take to get value out of the application. Minimizing the misunderstandings for the sales team Increasing customer retention. If we can get the Customer Success team to know all of the use cases around the products, they can share the whole value around the solution, thus increasing retention. Increasing the ramp time for sales, CS. We will increase the pace of hiring and will need to help them to know about our product & industry in as a short period of time as possible.
We have been working for the past few months on new
product releases and enablement for our customer-facing
teams. We have technology, software, processes, &
people that we have used to "appropriately" spread
knowledge to the audiences, But, to your point, we have
not been targeted in our approach. And we have not picked
that key "Pain Point" that we should start with.
Any thoughts as to which would be the highest reward
with ease of implementation? to get that Bang for our
early buck?
Jay.
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming
from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a
complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in
terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand
where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might
be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the
most variance in performance among people doing similar
types of work? Which processes have high variance of
outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of
resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place
to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and
where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach
check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and
now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an
accelerator and via referrals).
Good luck.
--
-Tom
--
Tom
Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Jay Kreshel
Thanks for the reply. My boss EVP in Customer Success works on the executive staff. His discussions with the head of Marketing and Head of Sales. Their objectives are mostly around: Decreasing the amount of time our customers take to get value out of the application. Minimizing the misunderstandings for the sales team Increasing customer retention. If we can get the Customer Success team to know all of the use cases around the products, they can share the whole value around the solution, thus increasing retention. Increasing the ramp time for sales, CS. We will increase the pace of hiring and will need to help them to know about our product & industry in as a short period of time as possible.
We have been working for the past few months on new product releases and enablement for our customer-facing teams. We have technology, software, processes, & people that we have used to "appropriately" spread knowledge to the audiences, But, to your point, we have not been targeted in our approach. And we have not picked that key "Pain Point" that we should start with.
Any thoughts as to which would be the highest reward with ease of implementation? to get that Bang for our early buck?
Jay.
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the most variance in performance among people doing similar types of work? Which processes have high variance of outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an accelerator and via referrals).
Good luck.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Re: Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Who’s asking you to do it? Depending on where it’s coming from, it could reduce the emphasis placed on developing a complete value proposition for exec staff, at least in terms of a heavily quantifiable one.
As for your approach, I’d start by trying to understand where the biggest gaps are that KM-type approaches might be able to bridge. Where are places where there is the most variance in performance among people doing similar types of work? Which processes have high variance of outcome? Which processes leverage the most amount of resource, either in terms of inputs or outcomes?
By understanding this a bit more you’ll be in a good place to identify potential pain points that KM can address, and where the bang for KM buck is the greatest.
If you’d like to read more about his type of approach check out this chapter I wrote on KM Lessons Learned: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4goA-zLqqvBZWFmNGVjZWQtZTRlMi00ZWMzLWIzNTUtNTBjZjkzMzM0Y2Y4/view?usp=drivesdk
(PS - after 20 years as a KM practitioner I retired and now work with tech startups in the Bay Area through an accelerator and via referrals).
Good luck.
--
-Tom
--
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
Guidance for building KM in Hi-tech startup
#startup
Jay Kreshel
I have been asked to look into knowledge management for our company, a Hi-Tech start-up doing Artificial Intelligence for finance organizations.
I have been reading up on KM over the past week... sifting through the massive amount of articles, posts, and books.
I have come up with a plan to conquer my quest:
- Work with the executives to understand the value proposition for the km program
- Create a knowledge map of assets across the company & people
- Determine & Document how knowledge should flow: Document how knowledge is created, captured, organized, reviewed, shared, and used.
- Get buy-in and budget for the program
- List the core program Objectives
- Become smarter on knowledge management tools and approaches
- Create a business case with KM approaches, roles, budget, metrics, etc.
- Execute on each KM approach / program
FIRST, is my approach a good one?
SECOND: Can anyone direct me to previously created Business Plans, Value Proposition Slides, etc., that I can use to communicate with my executive staff?
THIRD: What other smaller Tech companies (hopefully in the Silicon Valley ) can I reference to mirror my program after for a starting point.
Thanks again to Stan for the response to my LinkedIn Request.
Jay.
|
|
|
No, that's great David -- you've identified a nice range of
specific and broad metrics there, including internal and external
reports.
If you don't mind me probing a little further:
- What have you found works best for surveys? Periodic or
ongoing (ie just having a self-survey form online for anyone to
fill in)? Single questions or a more comprehensive effort?
- Do you track your various liaison efforts (as you might in a
CRM for more traditional customers)? Does it concern you if you
identify an area that is neutral or hostile to your efforts, or
are you just focusing on serving those receptive to your needs?
I am asking as much for the group as for myself. I think it's so
important for everyone to hear real stories about how KM
initiatives play out!
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 20/05/2021 12:14 am, David Graffagna
wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Stephen,
Great questions. I know from personal experience how changes in
sponsors or leadership can impact KM initiatives so demonstrating
value is key. It is also imperative to remain aligned as
organizational goals change, new functions or areas of emphasis
arise, or organization structure changes are implemented.
Without getting into a lot of detail, we assess our KM success
based on a number of things, some of which are specific to
individual initiatives. For example:
- User Perception/Customer Satisfaction … we regularly survey
our end-user audiences on how and they are using KM, where
they are finding the most value (e.g., what's the perceived
value of our efforts/initiatives), what issues they are
typically trying to solve with KM, where they would like to
see changes/enhancements to our efforts, etc.
- Direct Alignment with Business Unit & Functional Area
Leadership … we have established liaison relationships with
leadership from various areas of the business allowing us to:
a) provide those leaders with insight into how people in their
areas are using KM, b) continually align our efforts with
their goals, c) ensure KM is getting more and more embedded in
their work processes, d) identify new or expanding areas where
we can offer support, etc.
- Practical Measures … typical measures such as site visits
and resource usage, content ratings, content/resource
submissions, etc.
- Tying to Leadership Reporting Vehicles … connecting some of
our efforts directly into reporting tools used by leadership
to assess projects (e.g., lessons learned as part of quarterly
leadership reporting dashboard).
- KM Mentions … a bit selfishly, we also follow when, where
and how often KM is mentioned/referenced in a wide variety of
communication vehicles (e.g., CoP discussions, business area
presentations/town halls, intranet articles/posts, internal
newsletters, etc.)
Not certain that answers 100% of your questions Stephen, but that
is where we are 18 months into our journey.
Best,
David
|
|
|
This remains the gold standard for KM explanations for many of us ;-)
On 17 May 2021, at 17:24, Tom Short <tshortconsulting@...> wrote:
<km-dilbert.gif> -- -Tom --
Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457
|
|
|
This thread has been an excellent learning experience. Though we are a technology company, not consultants per se, we have honed two definitions that may be of value to this forum. They are:
Organizational Knowledge – The aggregate
value of an organization’s workforce knowledge related to its strategies, structures,
products, services, functions, procedures, tasks, and processes that employees,
partners, and suppliers must know to accomplish organizational goals and
objectives. What customers need to know to enhance their understanding and use of
an organization’s products and services.
Knowledge Management (KM) – Coordinated
activity of identifying if and where the cognitive knowledge of an organization
exists, how it is used, and how that knowledge flows through the organization
to optimize organizational goals and objectives. KM is concerned with the
overall development and alignment of operational, product, and service
knowledge, workforce talent and skills, and workforce cultures. KM is an umbrella term that includes Change Management,
Training & Development, Learning & Development, Instructional Design,
Lean, and ISO Quality Management.
Dennis L. ThomasIQStrategix (810) 662-5199
Leveraging Organizational Knowledge
On May 19, 2021 at 10:15:03 AM, David Graffagna (davidgraffagna@...) wrote: Stephen, Great questions. I know from personal experience how changes in sponsors or leadership can impact KM initiatives so demonstrating value is key. It is also imperative to remain aligned as organizational goals change, new functions or areas of emphasis arise, or organization structure changes are implemented. Without getting into a lot of detail, we assess our KM success based on a number of things, some of which are specific to individual initiatives. For example:
- User Perception/Customer Satisfaction … we regularly survey our end-user audiences on how and they are using KM, where they are finding the most value (e.g., what's the perceived value of our efforts/initiatives), what issues they are typically trying to solve with KM, where they would like to see changes/enhancements to our efforts, etc.
- Direct Alignment with Business Unit & Functional Area Leadership … we have established liaison relationships with leadership from various areas of the business allowing us to: a) provide those leaders with insight into how people in their areas are using KM, b) continually align our efforts with their goals, c) ensure KM is getting more and more embedded in their work processes, d) identify new or expanding areas where we can offer support, etc.
- Practical Measures … typical measures such as site visits and resource usage, content ratings, content/resource submissions, etc.
- Tying to Leadership Reporting Vehicles … connecting some of our efforts directly into reporting tools used by leadership to assess projects (e.g., lessons learned as part of quarterly leadership reporting dashboard).
- KM Mentions … a bit selfishly, we also follow when, where and how often KM is mentioned/referenced in a wide variety of communication vehicles (e.g., CoP discussions, business area presentations/town halls, intranet articles/posts, internal newsletters, etc.)
Not certain that answers 100% of your questions Stephen, but that is where we are 18 months into our journey. Best, David
|
|
|
