1. main@SIKM.groups.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
Re: Go-to resources for developing a KM Strategy? #strategy

Dave Snowden
 

Well you can come on the stand - which is being manned by our lead medical anthropologist and head of our Health Practice who also happens to be my daughter - the more reasonable aspect of the Snowden family





Prof Dave Snowden

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



On 7 Nov 2022, at 06:35, Kim Glover via groups.io <kim.glover@...> wrote:

Dave’s workshop at KMWorld is always the most jam-packed, in the biggest room, and I am always sad to miss it, holding another workshop at a competing time – and a smaller room. 😊
 

Kim Glover

Director, Knowledge Management & Social Learning  |  People and Culture

P  +1 281 405 7069  |  M  +1 832 472 2983

kim.glover@...

 
Re: Go-to resources for developing a KM Strategy? #strategy

Kim Glover
 

Dave’s workshop at KMWorld is always the most jam-packed, in the biggest room, and I am always sad to miss it, holding another workshop at a competing time – and a smaller room. 😊

 

Kim Glover

Director, Knowledge Management & Social Learning  |  People and Culture

P  +1 281 405 7069  |  M  +1 832 472 2983

kim.glover@...

 
Re: Go-to resources for developing a KM Strategy? #strategy

Dave Snowden
 

Teaching that this afternoon at KM World and launching some fast start programmes





Prof Dave Snowden

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



On 7 Nov 2022, at 06:18, Nick Milton <nick.milton@...> wrote:

 
Nick Milton
Knoco Ltd

 
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Hamish Tacey
Sent: 07 November 2022 10:44
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: [SIKM] Go to resource/s for developing a KM Strategy?
 
Hello all,
 
What would be the go-to simple resource that can help with the process of developing an organisations KM Strategy? 
 
Like defining the strategy document structure, the process to develop a strategy, the methodology to develop it etc.. 
 
Thank you
Hamish
November 2022 SIKM Call: Arthur Shelley - Becoming Adaptable: the art of creative facilitation to develop individuals and collective capabilities and to share knowledge #monthly-call

Arthur Shelley
 

Hello SIKM Leaders members,

 

I am honoured to be interacting with you at Stan’s monthly call next week.

As announced, we will be doing this one as a 4 PM call, rather than the usual 11 AM Eastern USA Time.

8 AM for me here in Australia is far more social that the previous sessions I have done at 3 AM - Thank you Stan 😊. Maybe less busy for east Coast USA too as you round out your day.

 

In this conversational session we will explore why Becoming Adaptable is important and how this is relevant to building a collaborative culture for knowledge sharing.

We will explore how even knowledge itself is and adaptable science, including why the world shifts through the cocreation and application of new knowledge (faster than competitors).

This approach is equally applicable to not for profits as it is for commercial and government entities, as we all need to remain relevant to our stakeholders, who are undergoing rapid change as well.

I am looking forward to sharing insights around these concepts through “Collaborative Conversation Spirals”.

See you all next week.

 

Dr Arthur Shelley

Principal: www.IntelligentAnswers.com.au 

Founder: Organizational Zoo Ambassadors Network

Mb. +61 413 047 408  Twitter: @Metaphorage

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/arthurshelley/

Author: Becoming Adaptable Creative facilitation to develop yourself and transform cultures (2021)

Earlier Books: KNOWledge SUCCESSion  Sustained performance and capability growth through knowledge projects (2017)

The Organizational Zoo (2007) & Being a Successful Knowledge Leader (2009)

 
Re: Go-to resources for developing a KM Strategy? #strategy

Nick Milton
 
Edited

Designing a Successful KM Strategy: A Guide for the Knowledge Management Professional

 

Nick Milton
Knoco Ltd

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Hamish Tacey
Sent: 07 November 2022 10:44
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: [SIKM] Go to resource/s for developing a KM Strategy?

 

Hello all,

 

What would be the go-to simple resource that can help with the process of developing an organisations KM Strategy?

 

Like defining the strategy document structure, the process to develop a strategy, the methodology to develop it etc..

 

Thank you

Hamish

 
Go-to resources for developing a KM Strategy? #strategy

Hamish Tacey
 

Hello all,

What would be the go-to simple resource that can help with the process of developing an organisations KM Strategy?

Like defining the strategy document structure, the process to develop a strategy, the methodology to develop it etc..

Thank you
Hamish
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Barbara Fillip
 

In fact, since this appears to be born out of a concern for project knowledge, it may need to be interpreted specifically in that context.  This article from PMI looks at the connections between project management maturity models and knowledge management maturity models, eventually developing a model that combines them:  Management of project knowledge at various maturity levels in PMO, a theoretical framework, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/management-project-knowledge-maturity-levels-8928

Best,
Barbara Fillip

On Wed, Nov 2, 2022 at 8:10 PM Tom Olney <tolney@...> wrote:

Here’s a link to the PMI website re: knowledge management. Perhaps this will give you some good information:

Project management knowledge management (pmi.org)

 

Tom Olney – PMP, CKM

PSCU

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit=iqbusiness.net@groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

CAUTION: This email originated outside of PSCU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, use the Phish Alert button at the top of your Outlook toolbar to report suspicious emails.

 
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Guillermo A. Galdamez
 

Hi Madeleine,

I am happy to see the amount of conversation and engagement your question generated. Thanks for asking!

I'll try to contribute without being redundant to what others have previously written.

In my experience, when organizations use terms like "mature" to describe their end state for knowledge they are generally referring to several things:

  1. Knowledge is consistently captured and stored. As opposed to knowledge only existing within people's heads, key information and helpful facts are recorded somewhere in a deliberate, systemic way. It doesn't have to be a single, central location -- it can be several places, as long as each of these places are fit for purpose.
  2. Knowledge is categorized and organized in a predictable way. Once knowledge is captured, it should be organized in such a way that it is easy for people to make sense of what they are looking at. This also ties in to the next point.
  3. Knowledge is easy to find. People want to reference knowledge in order to do something else. They generally want to get the knowledge quickly so that they can move on with their task. 
  4. Knowledge is reliable. Knowledge is curated and updated consistently to ensure that it is trustworthy. Folks don't want to spend time validating what they've found.
  5. Knowledge is complete and interconnected. Knowledge gives a full picture of the situation, people don't want to spend time piecing together bits and pieces from multiple sources to understand what is going on.
  6. Knowledge is secure and protected. This may be more relevant in some settings than others, but generally you want to make sure that only the right people can access sensitive information.
Sadly, I don't have a single resource for a definition of mature knowledge that I can point you to, however, the following blog post may come close: "NERDy Content for the Enterprise". [full disclosure: my boss wrote that]

Beyond helping your organization define an end goal for their knowledge, I would encourage you to help them define the outcomes that they want to get out of it. From the perspective of project management this could be a variety of things:
  • Improving future project performance
  • Reducing costs / increasing profitability
  • Preserving/enhancing stakeholder relationships
  • Refining and promoting emerging approaches/practices

Keeping the above in mind, you can begin to prioritize your knowledge management efforts.  (I also love guiding folks to this blog post to give them an idea of what their first step may be: '6 Questions to Help Determine Where to Start Your KM Transformation')

I hope you find this helpful!  Feel free to reach out if you have any questions.

Best,

Guillermo


On Wed, Nov 2, 2022 at 9:36 PM Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit=iqbusiness.net@groups.io> wrote:
Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Madeleine Du Toit
 

Thank you all so much for your thoughtful input. It has certainly given me many angles to consider. 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Dennis Thomas <dlthomas@...>
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2022 6:37:06 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity
 
Hello Madeleine Du Toit, 

We are a technology company focused on the KM industry.   The more advanced queries we get are from companies that want to grow.  Their concerns are transferring organizational knowledge.  They have ERP systems (Enterprise Resource Planning) infrastructures, but the end-to-end business processes (the business intelligence) of those systems is hidden in data structures which in general, is unavailable to their workforce for knowledge transfer purposes.

If I were to define an "end-state,” I would say it is the human accessible, understandable, and usable  how-to, why, and what-if knowledge that is represented within their existing end-to-end business procedures,  tasks and processes, along with any dependent, contingent, or adhoc relationships required to represent the overall breadth and depth of those end-to-end knowledge structures. 

And organization may have several end-to-end business processes, such as:  Hire to Retire; Acquire to Retire; Plan to Inventory; Quote to Cash; Market to Order;  Idea to Offering; Prospect to Customer; Customer to Retention; etc.  These end-to-end procedures are core to every business.  It’s where real-world business intelligence resides.  The stuff that people have in their heads. 

We use this very language to help clarify the KM issue and to direct the conversation.  In most cases, referring to these terms generates a “blinding flash of the obvious” response from potential customers sitting on the opposite side of the table.   It's what practical business people understand because it’s  what business owners and operators have spent their careers learning and perfecting. 

Once the end-to-end discussion point has been made, accepted, and acknowledged, the next step is to correlate the end-to-end modeling process to their goals and objectives.  The beauty of this approach, for us, is that each end-to-end KM process can be defined in advance, achieved in milestone fashion, and successfully concluded with an end-state result.  Then, on to priority #2, #3, #4, etc.

Of course, it doesn’t hurt to have a cognitive technology that has the capacity to model the complexity of end-to-end business procedures and processes.  I know there are a few out there.

Also, keep in mind that Conversational AI is here now.  It is also called NLU (Natural Language Understanding).   So if the discussion centers on Tier One, Tier Two Customer Support, Digital Assistants, Smart Agents, Smart Assistants, or Smart Chatbots, etc. know that non-hype versions are coming out on the market, but they are few and far between.  

Good luck!

Dennis L Thomas
(810) 662-5199
dlthomas@...
IQStrategix.com

Leveraging Organizational Knowledge 


On Nov 2, 2022, 1:36 PM -0400, Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit@...>, wrote:
Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Dennis Thomas
 

Hello Madeleine Du Toit, 

We are a technology company focused on the KM industry.   The more advanced queries we get are from companies that want to grow.  Their concerns are transferring organizational knowledge.  They have ERP systems (Enterprise Resource Planning) infrastructures, but the end-to-end business processes (the business intelligence) of those systems is hidden in data structures which in general, is unavailable to their workforce for knowledge transfer purposes.

If I were to define an "end-state,” I would say it is the human accessible, understandable, and usable  how-to, why, and what-if knowledge that is represented within their existing end-to-end business procedures,  tasks and processes, along with any dependent, contingent, or adhoc relationships required to represent the overall breadth and depth of those end-to-end knowledge structures. 

And organization may have several end-to-end business processes, such as:  Hire to Retire; Acquire to Retire; Plan to Inventory; Quote to Cash; Market to Order;  Idea to Offering; Prospect to Customer; Customer to Retention; etc.  These end-to-end procedures are core to every business.  It’s where real-world business intelligence resides.  The stuff that people have in their heads. 

We use this very language to help clarify the KM issue and to direct the conversation.  In most cases, referring to these terms generates a “blinding flash of the obvious” response from potential customers sitting on the opposite side of the table.   It's what practical business people understand because it’s  what business owners and operators have spent their careers learning and perfecting. 

Once the end-to-end discussion point has been made, accepted, and acknowledged, the next step is to correlate the end-to-end modeling process to their goals and objectives.  The beauty of this approach, for us, is that each end-to-end KM process can be defined in advance, achieved in milestone fashion, and successfully concluded with an end-state result.  Then, on to priority #2, #3, #4, etc.

Of course, it doesn’t hurt to have a cognitive technology that has the capacity to model the complexity of end-to-end business procedures and processes.  I know there are a few out there.

Also, keep in mind that Conversational AI is here now.  It is also called NLU (Natural Language Understanding).   So if the discussion centers on Tier One, Tier Two Customer Support, Digital Assistants, Smart Agents, Smart Assistants, or Smart Chatbots, etc. know that non-hype versions are coming out on the market, but they are few and far between.  

Good luck!

Dennis L Thomas
(810) 662-5199
dlthomas@...
IQStrategix.com

Leveraging Organizational Knowledge 


On Nov 2, 2022, 1:36 PM -0400, Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit@...>, wrote:

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Matt Finch
 

This is also where I'm interested in exploring how scenario work can feed into KM - those key questions

  • What’s the “End game” for KM?
  • What does KM “maturity” look like?
  • How should KM be implemented to move the organization forward?

depend so much on extrinsic contextual factors, both within the business environment and beyond, that it might be fascinating as well as useful to manufacture contrasting and challenging plausible visions of the futures which await.

What does "the end game"/maturity/successful implementation look like, depending on the future context that the organization finds itself moving into - and especially if it's not a context that was anticipated or desired? 

Matt

On 3 Nov 2022, at 21:06, David Graffagna <davidgraffagna@...> wrote:

Madeleine,

I've been reading this exchange with interest and there are a lot of good insights, resources, etc. that members have already shared, so I'm not sure I'm adding value ... but here goes! Hopefully this adds some beneficial perspective for you.

I've been in my current KM role for a little over 3 years. I was brought into this particular global business unit (GBU) essentially to establish KM (e.g., define scope, create strategy, execute) as a value-add to the organization. From this exchange, the things that have resonated most with me are statements regarding:
  • What’s the “End game” for KM?
  • What does KM “maturity” look like?
  • How should KM be implemented to move the organization forward?

End Game? For me, my organization, and in particular my KM Team, we established a very high-level, long-term vision (e.g., 5 years) of what would we be doing differently/what would things look like if we were doing KM better in 5 years than we are today. In the same breath, also saying "There is no end-point, we will always be moving the goal line as we evolve, improve, increase our understanding of business needs, etc." But, our focus is "There's a better organizational KM out there somewhere, let's move in that direction." 

Maturity? Our GBU consists of more than a dozen Centers of Excellence (CoEs) and Functional Areas that each have different focuses, scope, expertise, approaches, etc. We created a very simplistic maturity self-assessment asking about their level of maturity/comfort with their efforts around things like:
  • Providing a clear and current mission/vision;
  • Identifying expertise within their area;
  • Encouraging input (e.g., what, if any, vehicles do they have in place for contact – input, feedback and questions);
  • Establishing and capturing standards and reference resources;
  • Capturing, sharing, leveraging lessons learned;
  • Helping their audiences (direct and indirect) navigate (e.g., find, understand and apply) their resources, expertise, etc.;
  • And so on.

 

For us this accomplishes several things:
  1. Gives KM Team a view into each area, what they have and what they don't, highlight areas where KM might help them, and provides an opportunity to evaluate new and enhanced approaches;
  2. Allows each area to 'self-assess' and get a clear picture for themselves of where their focus is, what gaps exist, areas of strength as well as opportunities for improvement, etc.;
  3. Provides leadership insight into what’s going on in different areas, compare areas and prioritize KM-related efforts to increase the value coming out of each CoE/Function and the GBU as a whole.

 

Implementation? For us, implementation of KM efforts and initiatives have always been about small, incremental wins that each build on each other. That way we bring along our audiences without losing them by moving too quickly, and allows us to:
  • Demonstrate and display value,
  • Build credibility for KM activities,
  • Establish a foothold for partnering with CoEs,
  • Grow our presence within the GBU.

 

Best regards,

 

David B. Graffagna

 
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

David Graffagna
 

Madeleine,

I've been reading this exchange with interest and there are a lot of good insights, resources, etc. that members have already shared, so I'm not sure I'm adding value ... but here goes! Hopefully this adds some beneficial perspective for you.

I've been in my current KM role for a little over 3 years. I was brought into this particular global business unit (GBU) essentially to establish KM (e.g., define scope, create strategy, execute) as a value-add to the organization. From this exchange, the things that have resonated most with me are statements regarding:

  • What’s the “End game” for KM?
  • What does KM “maturity” look like?
  • How should KM be implemented to move the organization forward?


End Game? For me, my organization, and in particular my KM Team, we established a very high-level, long-term vision (e.g., 5 years) of what would we be doing differently/what would things look like if we were doing KM better in 5 years than we are today. In the same breath, also saying "There is no end-point, we will always be moving the goal line as we evolve, improve, increase our understanding of business needs, etc." But, our focus is "There's a better organizational KM out there somewhere, let's move in that direction." 

Maturity? Our GBU consists of more than a dozen Centers of Excellence (CoEs) and Functional Areas that each have different focuses, scope, expertise, approaches, etc. We created a very simplistic maturity self-assessment asking about their level of maturity/comfort with their efforts around things like:

  • Providing a clear and current mission/vision;
  • Identifying expertise within their area;
  • Encouraging input (e.g., what, if any, vehicles do they have in place for contact – input, feedback and questions);
  • Establishing and capturing standards and reference resources;
  • Capturing, sharing, leveraging lessons learned;
  • Helping their audiences (direct and indirect) navigate (e.g., find, understand and apply) their resources, expertise, etc.;
  • And so on.

 

For us this accomplishes several things:

  1. Gives KM Team a view into each area, what they have and what they don't, highlight areas where KM might help them, and provides an opportunity to evaluate new and enhanced approaches;
  2. Allows each area to 'self-assess' and get a clear picture for themselves of where their focus is, what gaps exist, areas of strength as well as opportunities for improvement, etc.;
  3. Provides leadership insight into what’s going on in different areas, compare areas and prioritize KM-related efforts to increase the value coming out of each CoE/Function and the GBU as a whole.

 

Implementation? For us, implementation of KM efforts and initiatives have always been about small, incremental wins that each build on each other. That way we bring along our audiences without losing them by moving too quickly, and allows us to:

  • Demonstrate and display value,
  • Build credibility for KM activities,
  • Establish a foothold for partnering with CoEs,
  • Grow our presence within the GBU.

 

Best regards,

 

David B. Graffagna

 
Open Source Tool for Qualitative Data #data-science #tools

Bahar Salimova
 

Hi everyone,

 

I am working with a team who needs to analyze large volumes of qualitative data quickly. It would have been ideal to use Nvivo, but it is an expensive option. Has anyone used an open source qualitative data analysis tool? Maybe Taguette or anything else?

 

Many thanks for your suggestions in advance,

 

Bahar

 

 

Bahar Salimova (She/Her)

Senior Operations Officer

Program Manager | GEMS Initiative

Fragility, Conflict and Violence (FCV)

Phone: +1 202-473-7178

E-mail: bsalimova@...

Web: www.worldbank.org/gems

 

1515683853275_WBG-FragilityViolence-Horizontal-RGB-web.jpg

 

 

 

 

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#10420) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Mute #maturity
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [bsalimova@...]

_._,_._,_
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Patrick Lambe
 

Absolutely Murray, in fact my thought on reading the original question was that the PM mindset is to manage from start to end, and that may be where the particular phrasing of the question came from. 

However, I’m not sure I agree on accommodating to this mindset too much, without giving some push back, especially with regard to double loop learning, and managing critical knowledge across multiple projects. I think your distinction between a project and a program is an excellent way to do that.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

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


On 3 Nov 2022, at 8:55 PM, Murray Jennex <murphjen@...> wrote:

I agree with you Patrick as I would look at learning how to do the analysis and how to improve that process as a reflection of KM maturity (you would be surprised how many organizations don't think of learning to do the process better and just focus on the outcome). I was just speculating that in the PM world they are probably looking at knowledge processes a little differently. PM is about managing short term activities to a conclusion, it is all about the end state when it comes to achieving project success and realizing project benefits. In that world asking for the end state is a very valid request and I think we need to work within their culture on this. Yes, we know that KM is an evolving set of capabilities and goals and continuous improvement. PM focuses on continuous improvement but with respect to very measurable goals. I don't think we will win many PMs over by not recognizing that they work in a world of short term activities with measurable goals and end states. Currently, PMs think of project knowledge as lessons learned, we can help them expand that concept to be more inclusive of process and capability improvement. However, I think PMs will only shake their heads at us if we refuse to work our concepts into the way their world works. PMs are more concerned with knowledge (singular) than broad knowledge (plural) and they are very focused on measuring benefits. When PMs say end state they mean after the project completes. Our answer that there is no end state means to PMs that we aren't talking projects and instead have moved into programs, perhaps we should state that very clearly PMs are not doing stand alone KM projects but that they need to look at as a KM program with a series of KM projects. The KM projects can and must have an end state with measurable benefits and goals. Most of our discussion has focused on the KM program (and rightfully so). My read of the original question leads me to see this difference in concepts and perhaps that is the first step to answering this question, emphasizing that KM is not a project but a program....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Nov 3, 2022 2:04 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi Murray

You are quite right to make a distinction between specific knowledge artefacts/ resources and knowledge in general or “knowledges” pertaining to a domain, and I accept that specific knowledge resources (usually explicit) may reach an end state. 

However, I find it more useful to think of the broader knowledge ground out of which those resources are produced, which guides how they are applied, and which determines when they need to be updated, discarded or replaced. And against that ground, (as you point out) different knowledge resources change at different paces - “knowledge pace layering” if you like. Managing that environment is the real point, I think.

For example, in your case of the engineering solution, yes the solution is interesting and important, but the “ground” of knowledge out of which that solution was produced and in which is it used, is the more important resource, I think, because it is that which tells us how and when to renew it.

Why more useful? Because none of what we do makes sense if we don’t look beyond the resource to the purpose and context of using the resource.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

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

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

On 3 Nov 2022, at 2:31 AM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

Patrick, I understand when you use the term knowledge you are using it in plural, no problem, I just didn't want you to think I was criticizing something I wasn't. My question and point is that as knowledge (in a singular state) matures it may reach an end state where it is only historical/archival in nature and will no longer mature. It may be used again, but it may not. For example, I do an engineering analysis of a problem and reach a solution, it is very useful knowledge as long as I have that component in service, but after a while the component becomes obsolete and is replaced, the knowledge of fixing the problem becomes obsolete in that unless I can relate it to another component it may not be useful directly. I still may retain it for training purposes or historical purposes but for all intents and purposes it has reached its maturity and end of life. I could also apply this logic to many social situations as there are many things we believed as knowledge in the past that would no longer be considered useful or appropriate, that knowledge has reached end of life and is useful only for historical purposes. Frankly, I believe all knowledge has a life cycle with some life cycles being very long and others fairly short. So in this context, I would suggest there is an end state for knowledge....murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2022 11:17 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi Madeleine

I don’t think I would ever use the concept of “end state” with reference to knowledge, because all knowledge has to adapt continuously to changing demands, needs and opportunities. Projects may end, but the knowledge does not.

I do think capabilities are the right way to frame the question, because that covers the base of ensuring that knowledge is kept relevant. Similarly, I think one could define what a desirable knowledge environment/ infrastructure should look like to maintain different classes of knowledge to the necessary levels of relevance, accuracy, completeness, timely production, accessibility, etc.

For these attributes, not all knowledge classes are equal, “it depends” as you say what requirements they might want to set for different classes of knowledge. Some areas of knowledge are more slow moving or fast moving than others, and some forms of knowledge have very high dependencies and risk factors associated with them (e.g. when the technology changes quickly, or there are supply chain disruptions, or new regulatory requirements, or key lessons learned from a major incident).

I hope this is helpful

P


Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

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

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

On 2 Nov 2022, at 11:06 PM, Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit@...> wrote:

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Murray Jennex
 

I agree with you Patrick as I would look at learning how to do the analysis and how to improve that process as a reflection of KM maturity (you would be surprised how many organizations don't think of learning to do the process better and just focus on the outcome). I was just speculating that in the PM world they are probably looking at knowledge processes a little differently. PM is about managing short term activities to a conclusion, it is all about the end state when it comes to achieving project success and realizing project benefits. In that world asking for the end state is a very valid request and I think we need to work within their culture on this. Yes, we know that KM is an evolving set of capabilities and goals and continuous improvement. PM focuses on continuous improvement but with respect to very measurable goals. I don't think we will win many PMs over by not recognizing that they work in a world of short term activities with measurable goals and end states. Currently, PMs think of project knowledge as lessons learned, we can help them expand that concept to be more inclusive of process and capability improvement. However, I think PMs will only shake their heads at us if we refuse to work our concepts into the way their world works. PMs are more concerned with knowledge (singular) than broad knowledge (plural) and they are very focused on measuring benefits. When PMs say end state they mean after the project completes. Our answer that there is no end state means to PMs that we aren't talking projects and instead have moved into programs, perhaps we should state that very clearly PMs are not doing stand alone KM projects but that they need to look at as a KM program with a series of KM projects. The KM projects can and must have an end state with measurable benefits and goals. Most of our discussion has focused on the KM program (and rightfully so). My read of the original question leads me to see this difference in concepts and perhaps that is the first step to answering this question, emphasizing that KM is not a project but a program....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Nov 3, 2022 2:04 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi Murray

You are quite right to make a distinction between specific knowledge artefacts/ resources and knowledge in general or “knowledges” pertaining to a domain, and I accept that specific knowledge resources (usually explicit) may reach an end state. 

However, I find it more useful to think of the broader knowledge ground out of which those resources are produced, which guides how they are applied, and which determines when they need to be updated, discarded or replaced. And against that ground, (as you point out) different knowledge resources change at different paces - “knowledge pace layering” if you like. Managing that environment is the real point, I think.

For example, in your case of the engineering solution, yes the solution is interesting and important, but the “ground” of knowledge out of which that solution was produced and in which is it used, is the more important resource, I think, because it is that which tells us how and when to renew it.

Why more useful? Because none of what we do makes sense if we don’t look beyond the resource to the purpose and context of using the resource.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

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


On 3 Nov 2022, at 2:31 AM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

Patrick, I understand when you use the term knowledge you are using it in plural, no problem, I just didn't want you to think I was criticizing something I wasn't. My question and point is that as knowledge (in a singular state) matures it may reach an end state where it is only historical/archival in nature and will no longer mature. It may be used again, but it may not. For example, I do an engineering analysis of a problem and reach a solution, it is very useful knowledge as long as I have that component in service, but after a while the component becomes obsolete and is replaced, the knowledge of fixing the problem becomes obsolete in that unless I can relate it to another component it may not be useful directly. I still may retain it for training purposes or historical purposes but for all intents and purposes it has reached its maturity and end of life. I could also apply this logic to many social situations as there are many things we believed as knowledge in the past that would no longer be considered useful or appropriate, that knowledge has reached end of life and is useful only for historical purposes. Frankly, I believe all knowledge has a life cycle with some life cycles being very long and others fairly short. So in this context, I would suggest there is an end state for knowledge....murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2022 11:17 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi Madeleine

I don’t think I would ever use the concept of “end state” with reference to knowledge, because all knowledge has to adapt continuously to changing demands, needs and opportunities. Projects may end, but the knowledge does not.

I do think capabilities are the right way to frame the question, because that covers the base of ensuring that knowledge is kept relevant. Similarly, I think one could define what a desirable knowledge environment/ infrastructure should look like to maintain different classes of knowledge to the necessary levels of relevance, accuracy, completeness, timely production, accessibility, etc.

For these attributes, not all knowledge classes are equal, “it depends” as you say what requirements they might want to set for different classes of knowledge. Some areas of knowledge are more slow moving or fast moving than others, and some forms of knowledge have very high dependencies and risk factors associated with them (e.g. when the technology changes quickly, or there are supply chain disruptions, or new regulatory requirements, or key lessons learned from a major incident).

I hope this is helpful

P


Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:  +65 98528511

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

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

On 2 Nov 2022, at 11:06 PM, Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit@...> wrote:

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>
Re: Content Library Quality Assurance at Scale #content-management #CoP

Kelsey George
 

Hi Mary,

I have some experience in automating workflows. Would you mind clarifying which point of the process you are looking to automate? 

If you are looking to automate at time of accession, there are several open source tools for collecting technical metadata from digital files, such as Harvard's FITS and Seth Shaw's DataAccessioner, that might allow you to automatically gather the technical metadata. With some additional coding, it would be possible to auto-reject or approve for review based on the values of various collected fields. 

If you are looking to automate the review or approval process, that is likely possible depending on what enterprise softwares you are using or the coding skill of your team. I've automated a chain of review/approval processes for compliance using Microsoft Power Automate, and I know there are other similar software capabilities in platforms such as ServiceNow or ticketing systems such as JIRA or Autodesk. 

Hopefully that gives you a place to start! I would also be happy to connect if you'd like to brainstorm further.

Kelsey George


On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 9:26 AM Stan Garfield <stangarfield@...> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:19 AM, Mary Palmieri wrote:
Right now our quality review process is all manual which we would like to optimize and automate in order to grow. I am writing a quality matrix for the organization as we speak to enable consistency among our team. Long term, I would like to automate this process as much as possible.
Can anyone respond to Mary? If so, that would be most helpful. Thanks!

Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Tim Powell
 

Hi Madeleine,

 

TLDR:  They’re asking you the wrong question. I’d advise you to dig further to determine their intention behind it.

==

I’m always guided by Peter Drucker’s visionary aphorism, “Knowledge is the business.”  And by Heraclitus’ that “You cannot step in the same river twice — because it’s never the same river.”

 

Like the business itself, Knowledge must be dynamic.  Is there an “end state” envisioned for the enterprise — a sale of the business, for example, or declaration of bankruptcy?  Assuming not, the construct of an “end state” for knowledge exists in theory only.  In practice, knowledge must continually evolve to meet the ever-changing needs of the enterprise — and changing conditions in the business ecosystem.

 

I’m seconding similar comments made by Patrick, Nancy and others earlier.  Even the name “end state” implies that Knowledge can/should be static — far from the case, in my experience.

 

This is not just my opinion.  The ISO 9001:2015 specification states clearly (in section 7.1.6) that the continual refreshing of organizational knowledge is a core knowledge role. In my experience, though, it’s too often overlooked in the day-to-day practice of KM.

 

How to best achieve such “knowledge dynamism” is of great interest to me.  In fact, I’m hosting a workshop Monday afternoon at KMWorld on avoiding “zombie knowledge” — the walking dead of knowledge.

 

Thanks for this question that has already garnered some interesting and useful responses!

 

tp

 

TIM WOOD POWELL | President, The Knowledge Agency® | Author, The Value of Knowledge |

New York City, USA  |  TEL +1.212.243.1200 | 

SITE KnowledgeAgency.com | BLOG TimWoodPowell.com |

 

 

From: <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of "Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io" <mdutoit@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

 

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

Re: Content Library Quality Assurance at Scale #content-management #CoP

Stan Garfield
 

On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:19 AM, Mary Palmieri wrote:
Right now our quality review process is all manual which we would like to optimize and automate in order to grow. I am writing a quality matrix for the organization as we speak to enable consistency among our team. Long term, I would like to automate this process as much as possible.
Can anyone respond to Mary? If so, that would be most helpful. Thanks!
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Robert L. Bogue
 

As I’ve been watching this I’ve been considering the original question and wondering if we’re talking about an end state – or if we’re talking about a vision.  The distinction I’m making is that an end state is more prescriptive.  A vision is less specific and more inspiring.

 

That leads me to the question – how would we know if we have an organization that’s mature in it’s KM initiatives?  Is the evidence found in a set of policies and procedures that make knowledge management an explicit part of the functioning of the organization? (and at what level since 100% isn’t reasonable)  Is it the way that people behave in terms of capturing, codifying, and sharing their own knowledge?

 

Maturity models and the ISO standard are fine but not always so great on knowing when the destination has been reached (if that’s possible.)

 

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 Patrick Lambe via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2022 3:05 AM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

 

Hi Murray

 

You are quite right to make a distinction between specific knowledge artefacts/ resources and knowledge in general or “knowledges” pertaining to a domain, and I accept that specific knowledge resources (usually explicit) may reach an end state. 

 

However, I find it more useful to think of the broader knowledge ground out of which those resources are produced, which guides how they are applied, and which determines when they need to be updated, discarded or replaced. And against that ground, (as you point out) different knowledge resources change at different paces - “knowledge pace layering” if you like. Managing that environment is the real point, I think.

 

For example, in your case of the engineering solution, yes the solution is interesting and important, but the “ground” of knowledge out of which that solution was produced and in which is it used, is the more important resource, I think, because it is that which tells us how and when to renew it.

 

Why more useful? Because none of what we do makes sense if we don’t look beyond the resource to the purpose and context of using the resource.

 

P

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:                                                    +65 98528511

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

 

On 3 Nov 2022, at 2:31 AM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:

 

Patrick, I understand when you use the term knowledge you are using it in plural, no problem, I just didn't want you to think I was criticizing something I wasn't. My question and point is that as knowledge (in a singular state) matures it may reach an end state where it is only historical/archival in nature and will no longer mature. It may be used again, but it may not. For example, I do an engineering analysis of a problem and reach a solution, it is very useful knowledge as long as I have that component in service, but after a while the component becomes obsolete and is replaced, the knowledge of fixing the problem becomes obsolete in that unless I can relate it to another component it may not be useful directly. I still may retain it for training purposes or historical purposes but for all intents and purposes it has reached its maturity and end of life. I could also apply this logic to many social situations as there are many things we believed as knowledge in the past that would no longer be considered useful or appropriate, that knowledge has reached end of life and is useful only for historical purposes. Frankly, I believe all knowledge has a life cycle with some life cycles being very long and others fairly short. So in this context, I would suggest there is an end state for knowledge....murray jennex

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@...>
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2022 11:17 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Hi Madeleine

 

I don’t think I would ever use the concept of “end state” with reference to knowledge, because all knowledge has to adapt continuously to changing demands, needs and opportunities. Projects may end, but the knowledge does not.

 

I do think capabilities are the right way to frame the question, because that covers the base of ensuring that knowledge is kept relevant. Similarly, I think one could define what a desirable knowledge environment/ infrastructure should look like to maintain different classes of knowledge to the necessary levels of relevance, accuracy, completeness, timely production, accessibility, etc.

 

For these attributes, not all knowledge classes are equal, “it depends” as you say what requirements they might want to set for different classes of knowledge. Some areas of knowledge are more slow moving or fast moving than others, and some forms of knowledge have very high dependencies and risk factors associated with them (e.g. when the technology changes quickly, or there are supply chain disruptions, or new regulatory requirements, or key lessons learned from a major incident).

 

I hope this is helpful

 

P

 

 

Patrick Lambe
Partner
Straits Knowledge

phone:                                                    +65 98528511

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

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

 

On 2 Nov 2022, at 11:06 PM, Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io <mdutoit@...> wrote:

 

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

 

<SK18th_Anniv2020_emailfooter (2).jpg>

 
Re: Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Chris Collison
 

Hi Madeline,

I’d echo a lot of what Nick says. 
Rather than importing someone else’s maturity model, I find it more empowering to work with a cross section of staff to envision what KM could be for your organisation.   Appreciative Inquiry is a helpful tool for getting to the “what good could look like”.  Then you can build your own model, tailored for the right granularity (Team?  Department? Division?).  That become scaffolding for the KM capability which you are trying to build – but it’s *your* scaffolding – not someone else’s which just happens to lead you to their own set of courses and consulting offers!   That's important for ownership – if people have good reason to pick holes in a model, they may end up intellectualizing KM rather than putting it to work. (More on the methodology for doing that in No More Consultants.)

 

On ISO30401, you could take a look at the KM Canvas which Paul Corney, Patricia Eng and I included with the KM Cookbook.  It contains a set of practical questions which map to the standard, and can be used to test readiness/resilience – and prompt the right conversations about priorities.

All the best for your journey...

Chris

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Nick Milton <nick.milton@...>
Date: Thursday, 3 November 2022 at 10:23
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

Madeleine, if you are looking for a “goal line” – ie something that can be measured against - you might consider ISO 30401, the Management Systems Standard for KM, with the following caveats:

 

  1. ISO 30401 is a standard for the management system behind KM, ISO being a management-system organisation which has a model for how management systems work. The standard therefore has much to say about governance, and little to say about which technologies, processes, roles etc to use. This is deliberate, as the standard must fit organisations of all types and sizes, and any framework of tools, processes etc could be sufficient provided the management system meets the objectives and outcomes of the KM management system and the needs of the stakeholders.
  2. It is a standard for organisations, so not for personal KM nor tribal knowledge. Specifically it is for organisations with a layer of top management or leadership who then delegate authorities downward in the organisation. There will be some styles of organisation which do not meet this description. Madeleine – you talk about supporting “an organisation” so you will know if this organisation fits this description.

 

Given these caveats, ISO 30401 can still be useful. I am not personally a huge fan of maturity models, as I see KM more as a cultural phase-shift rather than a gradual maturing. But if your organisation wants to know what an end-state might be for KM, one answer is “the end-state is a fully embedded, operating and continually improving KM management system”, and if they ask “how will we measure if we have got there”, one answer could be “you can measure against the criteria within ISO 30401”

 

Nick Milton


 

 

From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Madeleine Du Toit via groups.io
Sent: 02 November 2022 17:36
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: [SIKM] Knowledge Maturity #maturity

 

Hi, 
I'm currently assisting an organisation with managing their project knowledge. They are looking to me to define an end-state. Something they can work towards. They keep on throwing Knowledge Maturity into the mix..... what would mature knowledge look like? 
I know of APQC's Knowledge Maturity framework but that looks more at KM as a capability. Any ideas on where to look or what to use to define "mature knowledge"? I'm kind of leaning towards - it depends on what you want, but maybe you have some ideas. 

Appreciate the input

461 - 480 of 10756