Hi Omid, 

This is a legitimate inquiry statement to requestion the known and discover the unknown provided that there's a rigorous scientific methodology to verify and validate the findings.

Here's my response:

As long as people are interacting, reflecting, discussing, and working together, new Knowledge will be generated (constructivist epistemology). Knowledge has to be captured, organized, formalized and re-used until it evolves into a new form of knowledge - commonly known as knowledge management. The KM discipline is like a fluid that takes the shape of its recipient, is conditioned by its context, and is profiled by its application. Knowledge management (KM) serves the purpose for which it's designed.

At 3R Knowledge consulting, we design knowledge management for organizational excellence. We emphasize that KM behaviors are integrated and embedded within the different organizational aspects. 3R Knowledge management methodology addresses 6 organizational areas: Organizational Agility, Organizational Learning, Organizational Performance, Organizational Intangible Assets, Organizational Change, and Organizational Behaviors. For more info, you may check <https://www.3rconsulting.org/our-capabilities>

If out of fashion means that KM is no longer a marketing buzzword, that's fine. KM will continue to exist as people continue to constitute organizations. Organizations express their pain and needs in different ways however they are inherently referring to one shape and form of Knowledge management. Our role as KM leaders is to articulate the organizational needs using their vocabularies. 

 I'll be glad to continue the conversation in a call.

Thank you

Rachad 

On 29 Nov 2022, at 21:59, Kent Greenes <Kent@...> wrote:



I haven’t contributed to this community in many years, so my 2 cents on the topic of certification may not have much impact. But this is one perspective that has changed dramatically for me over the years, and I feel compelled to share my thoughts.

 

Those that know me may recall how strongly and loudly I spoke against certification back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s. In my mind, I could not grasp how someone could be good at KM without a lot of real-world practice, mainly due to the complexity of the human aspects of our discipline. This, coupled with my belief that the game-changing promise of KM could only be enabled through the sharing and transfer of tacit knowledge, aligned so well with my observations on the limits of training and knowledge in the form of content that I couldn’t see how someone could attend a certification course and “get KM good enough to make a difference.” Of course, I missed the reality that people could be practicing and certifying in parallel or in addition ☹.

 

And lest we forget how many of us early pioneers and leaders in KM felt “our” approach to KM was the only way … my own insecurity based on my need to be “the one” and concern about competition got in the way of so much progress!

 

But to my surprise, as the years rolled by and I engaged with many organizations who had KM resources that got their basics from KM certification (especially those overseas), I observed firsthand how it really helped people accelerate up the learning curve. How great is that! In fact, I often found in those engagements I was able to concentrate on co-delivering KM and accelerating the intended outcomes.

 

Bottom line is I’ve learned whatever helps is good, and KM certification falls into this category. I’m still learning to get out of my own way, but I think that will remain a work in progress!

 

Best wishes for all for a healthy and happy holiday season,

Kent

 

Kent Greenes

Mobile: 760-450-6355

www.greenesconsulting.com

 

Senior Fellow Human Capital & Program Director:

TCB Knowledge & Collaboration Council

TCB Change & Transformation Council

Kent.greenes@...

 

Note: My working day may not be your working day. Please do not feel obliged to reply to this email outside of your normal working hours.

 

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Patrick Lambe
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 1:55 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km

 

Hi Dave

 

Like you, I have written a few pieces on KM certification. The great Stan Garfield has put together what I think is a well rounded list on this topic, including a couple of my posts on why I think most forms are, at best, of limited value for the money, and at worst, in their time have actively damaged the community. 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-certifiable-knowledge-management-stan-garfield/

 

If I had to summarise my current views, I would say that most commercial certifications I have looked at tend to be more decorative than substantive. That’s not to say they completely lack value - but just not as “certifications”.

 

Some people I’ve spoken to who have taken these programs have valued the orientation to KM that the training has given them and/or the credentials that give them recognition in the job marketplace. That’s fine, as far as it goes.

 

My issue is that use of the term “certification” is misleading when all we have done is taken a training course because the term implies a professional competency, and neither the appearance of a credential nor an introductory overview to a field in short course will of themselves demonstrate a professional competency to objective and independently verifiable standards.

 

The CILIP KM Chartership programme is the only one I’m aware of that involves independent professional peer review of a practice portfolio, independent of the purchase of any training products.

 

https://www.cilip.org.uk/general/custom.asp?page=ProfessionalRegistrationKM

 

P

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:                                               +65 98528511

web:                                                  www.straitsknowledge.com
resources:                                         www.greenchameleon.com
knowledge mapping:          www.aithinsoftware.com

<image001.jpg>

 

On 29 Nov 2022, at 3:26 PM, Dave Snowden via groups.io <snowded@...> wrote:

 

Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?

Prof Dave Snowden

Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge

11 Pro

Please excuse predictive text errors and typos

On 29 Nov 2022, at 18:49, Douglas Weidner <douglas.weidner@...> wrote:



Martin,

Well stated, including most all the necessary and sufficient points that should be made and which do prove your point.

 

I would just like to clarify and/or enrich the implied 'People, Process and Technology concept,

especially for those who might still think that KM is just or mostly about technology.

 

Regarding People, traditional KM, especially as espoused in the early days by HR vs IT, was most often about training. 

The resultant emphasis was focused on skills and competencies, which is about Aptitudes.  However, there is another side to People - Attitudes (Mindsets, motivations, passion, aka engagement). 

 

In the much researched opinion of the KM Institute (KMI), the Knowledge Age is mostly about people's attitudes, to wit: highly engaged people will win every time, regardless of the latest, trending tool.

 

So, if KM is just about tools, whether AI or Social networking, et al, KM might wane. But if focusing attention toward human knowledge and measurably increased organizational performance, which should be the very heart of KM, Knowledge Management is alive and well, regardless what it might be called.

 

There is enough proof (case studies) that KM has been a success, that KMI has introduced the Master Certified Knowledge Manager (MCKM) to focus on learning from each other by writing, peer-reviewing, and publishing (KMI Press) the cases developed by past CKMers in their KM roles or KM team leadership positions.

 

Then, proven mastery of what it takes to be successful at KM will provide the next, more executive KM level, which we have dubbed the Certified Knowledge Officer (CKO)™.for obvious reasons.

 

KM is far from dead!

 

In fact, it is expanding rapidly, especially in diverse international regions where we will be providing CKM instruction in the dominant regional languages.  AnySIKM members who are fluent in their own regional language, as well as English, may want to contact me.

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

Vice Chairman, KM Institute

 

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:

Dear Omid,

To me, "Knowledge Management" is out of fashion for people who believe in magic. When enterprise social networking platforms appeared around 2005, the "old" concept of "Knowledge Management" was temporarily replaced with a new one, dubbed "Enterprise 2.0". When you look at sales presentations made at that time, collaboration platforms were presented as the ultimate solution to knowledge management, and some ill-informed managers actually believed it. Today, the same happens with "Artificial Intelligence", also considered by some as the ultimate solution to knowledge management. 

It is sad, because knowledge management is a serious discipline that cannot be addressed by technology alone. 

Beware the bandits who pretend that knowledge management can be automated.

 

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 8:02 PM Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote:

Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? 
Many thanks for your replies in advance,
Omid Omidvar

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Dave

On 29 Nov 2022, at 3:26 PM, Dave Snowden via groups.io <snowded@...> wrote:

Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?

Prof Dave Snowden

Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge

11 Pro

Please excuse predictive text errors and typos

On 29 Nov 2022, at 18:49, Douglas Weidner <douglas.weidner@...> wrote:



Martin,

Well stated, including most all the necessary and sufficient points that should be made and which do prove your point.

I would just like to clarify and/or enrich the implied 'People, Process and Technology concept,

especially for those who might still think that KM is just or mostly about technology.

Regarding People, traditional KM, especially as espoused in the early days by HR vs IT, was most often about training. 

The resultant emphasis was focused on skills and competencies, which is about Aptitudes.  However, there is another side to People - Attitudes (Mindsets, motivations, passion, aka engagement). 

In the much researched opinion of the KM Institute (KMI), the Knowledge Age is mostly about people's attitudes, to wit: highly engaged people will win every time, regardless of the latest, trending tool.

So, if KM is just about tools, whether AI or Social networking, et al, KM might wane. But if focusing attention toward human knowledge and measurably increased organizational performance, which should be the very heart of KM, Knowledge Management is alive and well, regardless what it might be called.

There is enough proof (case studies) that KM has been a success, that KMI has introduced the Master Certified Knowledge Manager (MCKM) to focus on learning from each other by writing, peer-reviewing, and publishing (KMI Press) the cases developed by past CKMers in their KM roles or KM team leadership positions.

Then, proven mastery of what it takes to be successful at KM will provide the next, more executive KM level, which we have dubbed the Certified Knowledge Officer (CKO)™.for obvious reasons.

KM is far from dead!

In fact, it is expanding rapidly, especially in diverse international regions where we will be providing CKM instruction in the dominant regional languages.  AnySIKM members who are fluent in their own regional language, as well as English, may want to contact me.

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

Vice Chairman, KM Institute

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:

Dear Omid,

To me, "Knowledge Management" is out of fashion for people who believe in magic. When enterprise social networking platforms appeared around 2005, the "old" concept of "Knowledge Management" was temporarily replaced with a new one, dubbed "Enterprise 2.0". When you look at sales presentations made at that time, collaboration platforms were presented as the ultimate solution to knowledge management, and some ill-informed managers actually believed it. Today, the same happens with "Artificial Intelligence", also considered by some as the ultimate solution to knowledge management. 

It is sad, because knowledge management is a serious discipline that cannot be addressed by technology alone. 

Beware the bandits who pretend that knowledge management can be automated.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 8:02 PM Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote:

Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? 
Many thanks for your replies in advance,
Omid Omidvar

On 29 Nov 2022, at 18:49, Douglas Weidner <douglas.weidner@...> wrote:



Martin,

Well stated, including most all the necessary and sufficient points that should be made and which do prove your point.

I would just like to clarify and/or enrich the implied 'People, Process and Technology concept,

especially for those who might still think that KM is just or mostly about technology.

Regarding People, traditional KM, especially as espoused in the early days by HR vs IT, was most often about training. 

The resultant emphasis was focused on skills and competencies, which is about Aptitudes.  However, there is another side to People - Attitudes (Mindsets, motivations, passion, aka engagement). 

In the much researched opinion of the KM Institute (KMI), the Knowledge Age is mostly about people's attitudes, to wit: highly engaged people will win every time, regardless of the latest, trending tool.

So, if KM is just about tools, whether AI or Social networking, et al, KM might wane. But if focusing attention toward human knowledge and measurably increased organizational performance, which should be the very heart of KM, Knowledge Management is alive and well, regardless what it might be called.

There is enough proof (case studies) that KM has been a success, that KMI has introduced the Master Certified Knowledge Manager (MCKM) to focus on learning from each other by writing, peer-reviewing, and publishing (KMI Press) the cases developed by past CKMers in their KM roles or KM team leadership positions.

Then, proven mastery of what it takes to be successful at KM will provide the next, more executive KM level, which we have dubbed the Certified Knowledge Officer (CKO)™.for obvious reasons.

KM is far from dead!

In fact, it is expanding rapidly, especially in diverse international regions where we will be providing CKM instruction in the dominant regional languages.  AnySIKM members who are fluent in their own regional language, as well as English, may want to contact me.

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

Vice Chairman, KM Institute

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:

Dear Omid,

To me, "Knowledge Management" is out of fashion for people who believe in magic. When enterprise social networking platforms appeared around 2005, the "old" concept of "Knowledge Management" was temporarily replaced with a new one, dubbed "Enterprise 2.0". When you look at sales presentations made at that time, collaboration platforms were presented as the ultimate solution to knowledge management, and some ill-informed managers actually believed it. Today, the same happens with "Artificial Intelligence", also considered by some as the ultimate solution to knowledge management. 

It is sad, because knowledge management is a serious discipline that cannot be addressed by technology alone. 

Beware the bandits who pretend that knowledge management can be automated.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 8:02 PM Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote:

Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? 
Many thanks for your replies in advance,
Omid Omidvar

On 29 Nov 2022, at 11:21, Nick Milton <nick.milton@...> wrote:



Hi Omid.

 

I would be very interested to know what metrics have you been using to determine the state of KM? Especially if you are trying to get a view across all geographies and industry sectors?

 

Personally I have found objective metrics hard to find, and many to be misleading. For example, the “google trends” graphs people often use to support the “KM is dead” hypothesis are misleading, as these only show the decrease in searches that use the KM term, and have to be normalised for the increase in searches overall (see http://www.nickmilton.com/2018/03/what-google-trends-really-tells-us.html). Similarly the growth in the numbers of people on LinkedIn with “Knowledge” in their job title has to be seen against the growth of linked-in itself.

 

My personal anecdotal evidence is that KM consulting hit a huge downturn during Covid from which it is only now recovering, but that KM within organisations may well have gained in status in response to remote working (see http://www.nickmilton.com/2021/05/how-covid-has-affected-km-in.html )

 

My other evidence is survey data, and in the past 3 surveys in 2014, 2017 and 2020, answered by (in total) over 1000 people working in KM worldwide, the majority (about 70%) responded that the importance of KM was increasing, a substantial minority said it is neither decreasing nor increasing, and a small minority said the importance is decreasing. http://www.nickmilton.com/2020/04/first-preliminary-results-from-knoco.html

 

Again, this is a survey of opinion rather than fact.

 

<image001.png>

 

So any suggestions for objective data would be welcomed!

 

Nick Milton
Knoco Ltd

 

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Omid Omidvar
Sent: 28 November 2022 19:02
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: [SIKM] State of the art, Knowledge management #maturity #state-of-KM

 

Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? 
Many thanks for your replies in advance,
Omid Omidvar

Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? 
Many thanks for your replies in advance,
Omid Omidvar

On 29 Nov 2022, at 01:22, Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:



The risk of that phrase has always been the implication that it is a one-way reductive process from knowledge to information.

That's not how we operate in theory or practice. Information encoding conceptualises, systematises, unifies, reinforces, and persists. The presence of these information artifacts becomes a new part of our individual and joint environments that can be used to guide and alter our ongoing knowledge practices, and in ways that would never have been possible without its representation and abstraction as information in the first place.

Yes, resilience and adaptability is important. But robustness in the face of disruption is a valuable outcome too, and the capture and reuse of information is a key means of improving robustness.

I note that depending on what you mean by "information centric", we may in fact be arguing the same point.

Cheers,
Stephen.

On 29/11/2022 8:44 am, Dave Snowden via groups.io wrote:

We always know more than we can say, we can always say more than we can write down

Iinformation Management is necessary, information centricity is dangerous.  Managing channels for knowledge to flow more resilient than codifying knowledge 

Prof Dave Snowden

Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge

Pro

www.cognitive-edge.com

On 28 Nov 2022, at 22:02, Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:



Hi Dave,

Isn't a key benefit of information-centric systems that they can sustain themselves beyond the knowledge of any individual participant?

If we focus only maintaining the active knowledge dynamics of individuals, then we risk creating structures that collapse as soon as key players leave.

Yes, the flip side risk is that we end up with ossified organisational processes, but the alternative of genuinely only keeping knowledge in people's heads seems like a recipe for rapid failure in the future.

Cheers,
Stephen.

On 28/11/2022 5:40 pm, Dave Snowden via groups.io wrote:

I’d be more cautious - the whole issue of what is or isn’t obsolete is a mute question.  I’d talk more about abandoning over structured, information centric systems which tend to run out of utility more quickly.   Chance and serendipitous discovery of knowledge is important and most KM approaches really don’t encourage that or are over depending on machine learning which is text only.

Prof Dave Snowden Director & Founder - The Cynefin Centre  CSO - The Cynefin Company Social Media: snowded dave.snowden@... thecynefin.co

On 28 Nov 2022, at 04:50, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

I agree Matt. I've been looking at this problem for several years and have proposed that KM strategy, as one of its core functions, identify critical knowledge and a strategy for preserving it. I've also proposed intentionally forgetting of obsolete knowledge (the track I co-chair at HICSS has a minitrack on intentionally forgetting). I've attached an article I wrote in 2013 on this topic and published in an issue of iKnow (I'm including the whole issue as there are several good articles on KM risk).  Thanks....murray jennex

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Finch <Matthew.Finch@...>
To: main@sikm.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Sent: Sun, Nov 27, 2022 8:19 am
Subject: [SIKM] "Everything dies, including information" / uncertainty and preservation of knowledge

"Everything dies, including information" - nice piece from Erik Sherman in MIT Technology Review: https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/10/26/1061308/death-of-information-digitization:

'You make educated guesses and hope for the best, but there are data sets that are lost because nobody knew they’d be useful...'There are never enough people or money to do all the necessary work—and formats are changing and multiplying all the time. 

One of the reasons I'm so interested in the use of foresight with KM = wise prioritisation of what we store and share can be informed by the perspective of imagined future contexts: what will we need to know, what will we wish we had preserved, in contrasting futures which challenge our assumptions about what comes next?

As the Bodleian Libraries’ Frankie Wilson put it at EBLIP 10 “Using Evidence in Times of Uncertainty”, sometimes we need to make strategic decisions which existing evidence seems to tell us not to... (Seems rather prescient now with pandemic hindsight).

M.

MATTHEW FINCH

Associate Fellow, Saïd Business School

https://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/about-us/people/matt-finch

Matthew.Finch@...

<iKnow May 2013 - small.pdf>

--

---

Stephen Bounds Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096

---

--

---

Stephen Bounds Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096

---