How the US Govt defines KM, CM, RM, and DM. Their definitions aren't that bad! #definition
|
Gregory Reid <gregorysreid@...>
In case anyone is interested, here is how the US Govt is defining knowledge, content, document and records management. They are actually not bad definitions for KM and its first cousins; it’s as good as any I have seen discussed in our forum. The definitions provided on the eGov pages are quite understandable and pragmatic and any normal educated human should be able to assimilate them. (Some of the more esoteric and ‘fancy’ KM definitions that I have seen over the years have zero use or value in the business/real world and do a complete disservice to what we are all attempting to accomplish for our clients or our employers, IMHO.)
I also like the breakout of the content, document and records management from KM under the eGov FEA model. It’s logical and I am using these definitions with all of my clients (with tweaking, of course). Are these perfect definitions? Nope and far from it, but I can send this list to my clients and at least have a common language to speak with them within business conversations. Besides, if you can’t trust the US Govt, who can you trust? LOL. Seriously, they work about 90% of the time for me across the multiple industries that my clients are in and my clients seem to grasp them quickly without a 3 hour training class on ‘What is KM’.
It is interesting that KM (or at least the term) has existed for about 14 or so years (+/-) and we as SME’s still can’t close on what ‘it’ is. This condition does make it hard to for executives to believe KM is a viable business process that provides value to an organization even though we all know this is true.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/egov/a-4-4-digital.htm
Regards,
Greg Reid InFuture LLC 617-848-9245
|
|
|
|
Gregory Reid <gregorysreid@...>
I hear that the link doesn’t work. Yet it is in the URL box on my browser….Hmmm.
Try this…www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-4-4-digit-knowledge.html
Greg
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Gregory Reid
In case anyone is interested, here is how the US Govt is defining knowledge, content, document and records management. They are actually not bad definitions for KM and its first cousins; it’s as good as any I have seen discussed in our forum. The definitions provided on the eGov pages are quite understandable and pragmatic and any normal educated human should be able to assimilate them. (Some of the more esoteric and ‘fancy’ KM definitions that I have seen over the years have zero use or value in the business/real world and do a complete disservice to what we are all attempting to accomplish for our clients or our employers, IMHO.)
I also like the breakout of the content, document and records management from KM under the eGov FEA model. It’s logical and I am using these definitions with all of my clients (with tweaking, of course). Are these perfect definitions? Nope and far from it, but I can send this list to my clients and at least have a common language to speak with them within business conversations. Besides, if you can’t trust the US Govt, who can you trust? LOL. Seriously, they work about 90% of the time for me across the multiple industries that my clients are in and my clients seem to grasp them quickly without a 3 hour training class on ‘What is KM’.
It is interesting that KM (or at least the term) has existed for about 14 or so years (+/-) and we as SME’s still can’t close on what ‘it’ is. This condition does make it hard to for executives to believe KM is a viable business process that provides value to an organization even though we all know this is true.
http://www.whitehou
Regards,
Greg Reid InFuture LLC 617-848-9245
|
|
|
|
David Snowden <snowded@...>
Its an interesting page
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I like the title for the list that follows: "Defines the set of capabilities that support the identification, gathering and transformation of documents, reports and other sources into meaningful information" and for that its a good list, but does anyone think the above comprises or encompasses knowledge management? As to an earlier comment "If you can't trust the US government who can you trust" - I would assume that intended ironically? If seriously I would be amused Dave Snowden Founder & Chief Scientific Officer Cognitive Edge Pte Ltd www.cognitive-edge.com NB I am now in Singapore to Mid October please use email to contact me not the mobile phone On 24 Aug 2006, at 23:38, Gregory Reid wrote: www.whitehouse. |
|
|
|
Greg Reid (InFuture) <Gregory.Reid@...>
Yes, of course it was a joke! LOL
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
------ Greg Reid InFuture LLC 617-848-9245 (Sent from my mobile device) ---- Original Message ----
From: "David Snowden" <snowded@...> Date: 8/24/06 7:20 pm To: "sikmleaders@..." <sikmleaders@...> Subj: Re: [sikmleaders] Good URL Link for FEA Model. Its an interesting page I like the title for the list that follows: "Defines the set of capabilities that support the identification, gathering and transformation of documents, reports and other sources into meaningful information" and for that its a good list, but does anyone think the above comprises or encompasses knowledge management? As to an earlier comment "If you can't trust the US government who can you trust" - I would assume that intended ironically? If seriously I would be amused Dave Snowden Founder & Chief Scientific Officer Cognitive Edge Pte Ltd www.cognitive-edge.com NB I am now in Singapore to Mid October please use email to contact me not the mobile phone On 24 Aug 2006, at 23:38, Gregory Reid wrote: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-4-4-digit-knowledge.html |
|
|
|
Jack Vinson <jackvinson@...>
Missing a letter in that url (the final "l"): http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-4-4-digital.html.
For those that are lazy, here
is what the current site says. There is more detail under each of the
definitions, so those who are interested should have a look
anyway.
Regards,
Jack Vinson, Ph.D.
Knowledge Jolt, Inc.
|
|
|
|
Gregory Reid <gregorysreid@...>
Thanks Jack.
The FEA has multiple components under each of this that it describes on the web site with a few pages of detail for each. Again, not perfect, but not bad, either.
Greg Reid
From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Jack Vinson
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 10:26 AM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] How the US Govt defines KM, CM, RM, and DM. Their definitions s aren't that bad!
Missing a letter in that url (the final "l"): http://www.whitehou
For those that are lazy, here is what the current site says. There is more detail under each of the definitions, so those who are interested should have a look anyway.
Regards,
Jack Vinson, Ph.D. Knowledge Jolt, Inc. |
|
|
|
steven.wieneke@...
We continue to find value in modeling an area of practice (AOP) as the
first step before attempting to "manage knowledge" within that area. A knowledge model of an area of practice may delineate between disciplines, processes, deliverables and tools. The model provides a graphical view of the breath and depth of the AOP as well as the "made up of" and "special type of" relationships between the forementioned. Our model of KM is far more inclusive than the definition below. KM is the domain or umbrella that includes CM, DM, RM and much, much more. There may be a subtle difference between Document and Record Management , but I see these as one in the same. Content Management in our practice is structuring what is contained in the documents, records and databases. Document/record management is "capabilities to support the storage, protection, archiving, classification and retirement of documents and database content". I believe the reason that KM has not been defined/understood is due to the lack of a comprehensive knowledge model of this domain. The challenge we face with the lack of a KM definition is not with executives because we convert our services into a tailored value proposition and actionable plans that they can relate to. Our challenge is with the KM community which argues to exclude rather than include and/or re-label complimentary disciplines as KM. My recommendation is to model the KM domain before we attempt to define it. This model needs to be inclusive not exclusive. We need a value proposition statement(s), but a proposition is not a definition. Regards, Steven Wieneke GM Technical Fellow Global Technical Memory Global Engineering General Motors Corporation steven.wieneke@... "Jack Vinson" <jackvinson@comca To: <sikmleaders@...> st.net> cc: Sent by: Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] How the US Govt defines KM, CM, RM, and DM. Their sikmleaders@yahoo definitions s aren't that bad! groups.com 08/28/2006 10:26 AM Please respond to sikmleaders Missing a letter in that url (the final "l"): http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-4-4-digital.html. For those that are lazy, here is what the current site says. There is more detail under each of the definitions, so those who are interested should have a look anyway. Content Management Defines the capabilities that manage the storage, maintenance and retrieval of documents and information of a system or website. Document Management Defines the set of capabilities that control the capture and maintenance of an organization’s documents and files. Knowledge Management Defines the set of capabilities that support the identification, gathering and transformation of documents, reports and other sources into meaningful information. Records Management Defines the set of capabilities to support the storage, protection, archiving, classification and retirement of documents and information. Regards, Jack Vinson, Ph.D. Knowledge Jolt, Inc. http://www.jackvinson.com |
|
|
|
Douglas Weidner <douglasweidner@...>
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Steven,
You paint a more robust picture of KM than many
want to bite off.
Those with attention deficit will not survive the
requisite rigors of KM.
Congratulations on your excellent work, getting
down to where the "rubber meets the road" (pun intended).
Douglas Weidner
Chairman, The International Knowledge Management Institute (KM Institute) 703-757-1395 douglas.weidner@... www.kminstitute.org
|
|
|
|
Tom Short <tom.short@...>
" Knowledge Management Defines the set of capabilities that support
the identification, gathering and transformation of documents, reports and other sources into meaningful information." Hmmm...rather suspect, IMHO: why the focus on transforming information into information? What about "knowledge" (you know, the tacit stuff - between the ears)? --- In sikmleaders@..., "Jack Vinson" <jackvinson@...> wrote: is more detail under each of the definitions, so those who are interestedshould have a look anyway.or website.document.html> Document Management Defines the set of capabilities that controlthe capture and maintenance of an organization's documents and files.knowledge.html> Knowledge Management Defines the set of capabilities that supportthe identification, gathering and transformation of documents, reportsand other sources into meaningful information.storage, protection, archiving, classification and retirement of documentsand information. |
|
|