Improving Collaboration with HR #HR-OD


Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

As I'm sure we all know, collaboration requires common language,
common purpose, and agreement to joint process. In my
organization, "KM" sits apart from HR and IT, and looks to partner
effectively with both to help clients at strategic and operational
levels.

But, I've got to admit, despite having some background in OD /
Learning and Development, I'm struggling with finding some common
ground with HR colleagues to improve our partnership and
collaboration, whether its combining workforce planning and knowledge
continuity into a wholistic approach for mutual clients, identifying
knowledge loss risks due to retirements, or launching a community of
practice for managers.

It would seem that root challenge is a definitional one - what
is "knowledge." When I've asked HR colleagues "so, what do YOU mean
by knowledge," I hear anything from "facts and
figures," "skills," "competencies," some synomym of qualifications
etc. I've so far been unable to influence the extention of
perspectives to also include broader definitions that have been
suggested by thought leaders over the last 12 years -- including some
members of this forum.

I'm reluctant to run down a "definition rat hole," but I see no
alternative at this point, except perhaps finding a joint KM/HR
project that will enable participants to learn by doing and draw
their own conclusions(which has been hampered so far by the lack of
common language).

Any suggestions on how to build common language and a simple commom
KM framework with HR colleagues would be much appreciated.

Dale Arseneault


Patti Anklam <patti@...>
 

Hi, Dale,
 
On-boarding programs are a good place for a connection. Adding modules to new hire orientation on how to use the intranet, how to find things, how to connect to people, and so on is a really good place to start.
 
 
/patti
(978)456-4175
 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Dale Arseneault
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 3:12 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] Improving Collaboration with HR

As I'm sure we all know, collaboration requires common language,
common purpose, and agreement to joint process. In my
organization, "KM" sits apart from HR and IT, and looks to partner
effectively with both to help clients at strategic and operational
levels.

But, I've got to admit, despite having some background in OD /
Learning and Development, I'm struggling with finding some common
ground with HR colleagues to improve our partnership and
collaboration, whether its combining workforce planning and knowledge
continuity into a wholistic approach for mutual clients, identifying
knowledge loss risks due to retirements, or launching a community of
practice for managers.

It would seem that root challenge is a definitional one - what
is "knowledge." When I've asked HR colleagues "so, what do YOU mean
by knowledge," I hear anything from "facts and
figures," "skills," "competencies," some synomym of qualifications
etc. I've so far been unable to influence the extention of
perspectives to also include broader definitions that have been
suggested by thought leaders over the last 12 years -- including some
members of this forum.

I'm reluctant to run down a "definition rat hole," but I see no
alternative at this point, except perhaps finding a joint KM/HR
project that will enable participants to learn by doing and draw
their own conclusions(which has been hampered so far by the lack of
common language).

Any suggestions on how to build common language and a simple commom
KM framework with HR colleagues would be much appreciated.

Dale Arseneault


Mark D Neff <mneff@...>
 


Some thoughts to get you started. Look at a KM competency framework. Look at KM roles. Look at KM job succession. Look at the KM needs of the HR community. Look at what the current HR challenges and help them develop KM practices to address those challenges. Help translate their goals of becoming a learning organization into KM terms. Identify HR practices and relate them to KM practices. Identify ways that you could use communities of practice to help HR professionals develop their KM skills. Look at what HR does and see how you can help them identify their critical knowledge and develop knowledge transfer procedures for them to support transitions/succession planning. Look at collaborative coaching (KM) and see how it overlaps mentoring (HR development activity). Enlicit their help in developing a KM orientation or KM learning modules. Work with them to figure out appropriate ways to incent and reward the adoption of KM practices. Oh, so many ways .... so little time ...

Enjoy,

Mark

Computer Sciences Corporation
Registered Office: 3170 Fairview Park Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, USA
Registered in Nevada, USA No: C-489-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



"Dale Arseneault"
Sent by: sikmleaders@...

04/14/2008 03:11 PM

Please respond to
sikmleaders@...

To
sikmleaders@...
cc
Subject
[sikmleaders] Improving Collaboration with HR





As I'm sure we all know, collaboration requires common language,
common purpose, and agreement to joint process. In my
organization, "KM" sits apart from HR and IT, and looks to partner
effectively with both to help clients at strategic and operational
levels.

But, I've got to admit, despite having some background in OD /
Learning and Development, I'm struggling with finding some common
ground with HR colleagues to improve our partnership and
collaboration, whether its combining workforce planning and knowledge
continuity into a wholistic approach for mutual clients, identifying
knowledge loss risks due to retirements, or launching a community of
practice for managers.

It would seem that root challenge is a definitional one - what
is "knowledge." When I've asked HR colleagues "so, what do YOU mean
by knowledge," I hear anything from "facts and
figures," "skills," "competencies," some synomym of qualifications
etc. I've so far been unable to influence the extention of
perspectives to also include broader definitions that have been
suggested by thought leaders over the last 12 years -- including some
members of this forum.

I'm reluctant to run down a "definition rat hole," but I see no
alternative at this point, except perhaps finding a joint KM/HR
project that will enable participants to learn by doing and draw
their own conclusions(which has been hampered so far by the lack of
common language).

Any suggestions on how to build common language and a simple commom
KM framework with HR colleagues would be much appreciated.

Dale Arseneault


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sikmleaders/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sikmleaders/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   mailto:sikmleaders-digest@...
   mailto:sikmleaders-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   sikmleaders-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Matt Moore <laalgadger@...>
 

Dale,

The challenge I have had working with HR groups often
goes beyond language into some fundamental differences
around what you do with people in the organisation.

HR groups are often focused on getting people in the
door (recruitment/attraction), getting people out of
the door (the leaving process, retrenchment) and
dealing with operational issues in between (pay,
harrassment, management failure). Among all the
firefighting, the productivity of employees seems to
be a minor concern.

So if you want to build bridges with HR, then you can
help them in some way with the recruitment, onboarding
& leaving processes. In my recent role, KM has done
the following with HR:
- Been part of the induction for new joiners.
- Carried out an SNA on middle managers as part of a
management developent program.
- Ran a narrative project looking at the new joiner
process.
We wanted to do a whole bunch more but that's another
story.

I would say an equally critical thing is to find
people in HR who see their role as more than
transactional. Find them. Support them. Talk to them.
There may not be that many of them. In some ways HR
faces a similar profile problem to KM. Many HR people
want to play a strategic role but spend all their time
helping inexperienced managers deal with mistakes -
just like KM folk get lumped with sorting out document
databases.

Matt


____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ


Stephanie Barnes
 

Hi Dale,

Stay away from the definitions rat-hole if you can; focus on the
components, I can usually get more agreement on those items than on
over-all terminology, i.e. talk about collaboration, mentoring, etc.

As for working with HR, I recently came across a model in an Org
Design workshop that I was attending that might help you, certainly I
found it a very useful framework to use in some recent conversations
that I have had with HR people. The framework is call the "Galbraith
Star" and looks at the following design elements: Structure, Tasks,
Decision Making, Rewards, People, and Information. KM comes into all
of those items in one form or another and will help give you a common
base to start from in talking with HR.

The other thing to do when you are talking to HR or any other
business partner is to tie it into a business process where they are
feeling some pain, it makes it much more tangible for them.

Hope that helps,
Best Regards,
Stephanie


Rick.Wallace@...
 

Dale
I had the luxury of running both the learning organization and the NAM HR team so I embedded action reviews and retrospects as a way of doing business in our core HR functions. We captured best practice that way globally around topgrading, succession planning and our performance review process to name a few. Our generalist then knew what to look for with their business partners so we have done retrospects with our supply chain as well. We are now on the way to embed KM which we call organizational learning in the biggest IT deploy in the companies history. If you asked anyone on the HR team what KM is the wouldn't know what you are talking about. I just went about embedding the process as a way to do work and went from there. We will embed in the succession planning process around critical jobs as we roll through our people strategy this year.  
Rick Wallace
636-293 2684 (Cell)
636-300-2300 ext 11641 (office)


 ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Dale Arseneault" [dalearseneault@...]
  Sent: 04/14/2008 07:11 PM GMT
  To: sikmleaders@...
  Subject: [sikmleaders] Improving Collaboration with HR


As I'm sure we all know, collaboration requires common language,
common purpose, and agreement to joint process. In my
organization, "KM" sits apart from HR and IT, and looks to partner
effectively with both to help clients at strategic and operational
levels.

But, I've got to admit, despite having some background in OD /
Learning and Development, I'm struggling with finding some common
ground with HR colleagues to improve our partnership and
collaboration, whether its combining workforce planning and knowledge
continuity into a wholistic approach for mutual clients, identifying
knowledge loss risks due to retirements, or launching a community of
practice for managers.

It would seem that root challenge is a definitional one - what
is "knowledge." When I've asked HR colleagues "so, what do YOU mean
by knowledge," I hear anything from "facts and
figures," "skills," "competencies," some synomym of qualifications
etc. I've so far been unable to influence the extention of
perspectives to also include broader definitions that have been
suggested by thought leaders over the last 12 years -- including some
members of this forum.

I'm reluctant to run down a "definition rat hole," but I see no
alternative at this point, except perhaps finding a joint KM/HR
project that will enable participants to learn by doing and draw
their own conclusions(which has been hampered so far by the lack of
common language).

Any suggestions on how to build common language and a simple commom
KM framework with HR colleagues would be much appreciated.

Dale Arseneault


Patrick Lambe
 

Hi Dale

If you don't have common ground despite best efforts, then I don't see the definitional route having much value, even agreed definitions tend to be only skin deep without a shared experience to ground them in.

So I'd suggest going with your last idea, of finding a common KM/HR problem to work at together, and build a shared understanding from there. It would help if it was an HR pain point (which HR finds fairly intractable) where you can see KM adding some value.

Best

P


On 15 Apr 2008, at 3:11 AM, Dale Arseneault wrote:

As I'm sure we all know, collaboration requires common language, 
common purpose, and agreement to joint process. In my 
organization, "KM" sits apart from HR and IT, and looks to partner 
effectively with both to help clients at strategic and operational 
levels.



Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Mark, in summary, you're saying treah HR as a client and help them
deal with their own knowledge challenges...

Great idea.. I wish I'd have thought of it..

Thanks!

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, Mark D Neff <mneff@...> wrote:

Some thoughts to get you started. Look at a KM competency
framework. Look
at KM roles. Look at KM job succession. Look at the KM needs of the
HR
community. Look at what the current HR challenges and help them
develop KM
practices to address those challenges. Help translate their goals
of
becoming a learning organization into KM terms. Identify HR
practices and
relate them to KM practices. Identify ways that you could use
communities
of practice to help HR professionals develop their KM skills. Look
at what
HR does and see how you can help them identify their critical
knowledge
and develop knowledge transfer procedures for them to support
transitions/succession planning. Look at collaborative coaching
(KM) and
see how it overlaps mentoring (HR development activity). Enlicit
their
help in developing a KM orientation or KM learning modules. Work
with them
to figure out appropriate ways to incent and reward the adoption of
KM
practices. Oh, so many ways .... so little time ...

Enjoy,

Mark

Computer Sciences Corporation
Registered Office: 3170 Fairview Park Drive, Falls Church, Virginia
22042,
USA
Registered in Nevada, USA No: C-489-59


Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Good idea Patti.. we are working with HR in the context of both staff
and new manager orientation programs (which HR is responsible for /
leads) to help participants get a better handle on what information
management is, where resources are, and what everyone's
responsibilities are for managing corporate information. No issue
there as information management is percieved as a bit removed from
HR's work

Where we run into challenge is when the topic moves more into tacit
knowledge, where there are strong connections, and some might argue
overlap, between HR and KM. And the challenge is communicating "what
KM brings to the party"..

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, "Patti Anklam" <patti@...> wrote:

Hi, Dale,

On-boarding programs are a good place for a connection. Adding
modules to
new hire orientation on how to use the intranet, how to find
things, how to
connect to people, and so on is a really good place to start.


/patti
http://www.pattianklam.com <http://www.pattianklam.com/>
(978)456-4175


Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Matt.. you appear to have "hit the nail on the head"..

.. and coincidentally, when talking with a recruiter yesterday (I'm
staffing another knowledge services position) that individual was
actually interested in KM, and was able to articulate some of the
knowledge challenges she was hearing surface in the recruiting
conversations she's having across the organization. She even
mentioned "you know, a lot of managers could use some sort of tool /
guidelines to help them map out the competencies and knowledge in
their groups so they can identify and deal with current and projected
gaps.. "

.. I think I've found one of those people you refer to in your
note ... someone who thinks beyond the transactional..

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, Matt Moore <laalgadger@...> wrote:

Dale,

The challenge I have had working with HR groups often
goes beyond language into some fundamental differences
around what you do with people in the organisation.

HR groups are often focused on getting people in the
door (recruitment/attraction), getting people out of
the door (the leaving process, retrenchment) and
dealing with operational issues in between (pay,
harrassment, management failure). Among all the
firefighting, the productivity of employees seems to
be a minor concern.

So if you want to build bridges with HR, then you can
help them in some way with the recruitment, onboarding
& leaving processes. In my recent role, KM has done
the following with HR:
- Been part of the induction for new joiners.
- Carried out an SNA on middle managers as part of a
management developent program.
- Ran a narrative project looking at the new joiner
process.
We wanted to do a whole bunch more but that's another
story.

I would say an equally critical thing is to find
people in HR who see their role as more than
transactional. Find them. Support them. Talk to them.
There may not be that many of them. In some ways HR
faces a similar profile problem to KM. Many HR people
want to play a strategic role but spend all their time
helping inexperienced managers deal with mistakes -
just like KM folk get lumped with sorting out document
databases.

Matt



Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Thanks Stephanie.. I absolutely want to stay away from definitional
rat holes.. but even, as you suggest, talking about colalboration
opens that slippery slope.. I've heard collaboration used as a
synonym for coordination, cooperation, co-evolution and a number of
other subtly different interaction types.. and clarity around that
definition is required in order to design and facilitate good
process..

We in KM are trying to focus on business - our broad based, long term
Knowledge Program objectives and outcomes, and near term strategy
strategy are closely tied to the organizations business strategy and
strategic outcomes. But we need to get more effective in partnering
to convert strategy to action and breaking down the silos.

Thanks for the tip on the framework.. I'll look into it.

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, "Stephanie"
<stephanie.barnes@...> wrote:

Hi Dale,

Stay away from the definitions rat-hole if you can; focus on the
components, I can usually get more agreement on those items than on
over-all terminology, i.e. talk about collaboration, mentoring, etc.

As for working with HR, I recently came across a model in an Org
Design workshop that I was attending that might help you, certainly
I
found it a very useful framework to use in some recent
conversations
that I have had with HR people. The framework is call
the "Galbraith
Star" and looks at the following design elements: Structure, Tasks,
Decision Making, Rewards, People, and Information. KM comes into
all
of those items in one form or another and will help give you a
common
base to start from in talking with HR.

The other thing to do when you are talking to HR or any other
business partner is to tie it into a business process where they
are
feeling some pain, it makes it much more tangible for them.

Hope that helps,
Best Regards,
Stephanie


Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Thanks Rick.. if I understand you correctly your approach was to
simply move forward with appropriate techniques to improve learning
from experience -- without applying a broad / overall label..

Related a bit to Mark Neff's comments.. interesting..

Dale Arseneault


--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, Rick.Wallace@... wrote:

Dale
I had the luxury of running both the learning organization and the
NAM HR team so I embedded action reviews and retrospects as a way of
doing business in our core HR functions. We captured best practice
that way globally around topgrading, succession planning and our
performance review process to name a few. Our generalist then knew
what to look for with their business partners so we have done
retrospects with our supply chain as well. We are now on the way to
embed KM which we call organizational learning in the biggest IT
deploy in the companies history. If you asked anyone on the HR team
what KM is the wouldn't know what you are talking about. I just went
about embedding the process as a way to do work and went from there.
We will embed in the succession planning process around critical jobs
as we roll through our people strategy this year.
Rick Wallace
636-293 2684 (Cell)
636-300-2300 ext 11641 (office)


Dale Arseneault <dalearseneault@...>
 

Thanks Patrick..

I'm beginning to see a trend in the comments..

"... work with HR as a client to solve their knowledge problems --
without definitions / labels -- and build their understanding of KM
in the process .. this will also build trust and a relationship upon
which to base a partnership to jointly solve client problems.. "

mmmm... I think I'll start having some exploratory conversations with
the HR Leadership Team bout their knowledge challenges..

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lambe <plambe@...> wrote:

Hi Dale

If you don't have common ground despite best efforts, then I don't
see the definitional route having much value, even agreed
definitions
tend to be only skin deep without a shared experience to ground
them in.

So I'd suggest going with your last idea, of finding a common
KM/HR
problem to work at together, and build a shared understanding from
there. It would help if it was an HR pain point (which HR finds
fairly intractable) where you can see KM adding some value.

Best

P

Patrick Lambe

weblog: www.greenchameleon.com
website: www.straitsknowledge.com
book: www.organisingknowledge.com


John Hovell <jhovell@...>
 

This is an interesting conversation about HR and KM.  At ManTech, we've found some interesting common ground between HR's focus on "talent management" and our focus on enterprise KM.  As you are probably aware, talent mgmt is focused on topics such as recruiting/retention, assessment/evaluation, compensation/benefits, performance mgmt, learning/development and succession planning...  We're working on a number of collaborative projects in the areas of recruiting/retention, learning/development and succession planning.  Then, from the KM perspective, we're earning some HR help on our knowledge market and communities of practice initiatives...  In terms of trying to speak a common language (or at least some form of understanding), "ManTechpedia" is proving to be quite helpful... (which is just our internal enterprise version of wikipedia)

Is anyone working else working along those same lines?  Or did I miss the conversation completely here? :)

Thanks!
John


At 08:48 AM 4/15/2008, you wrote:

Thanks Patrick..

I'm beginning to see a trend in the comments..

"... work with HR as a client to solve their knowledge problems --
without definitions / labels -- and build their understanding of KM
in the process .. this will also build trust and a relationship upon
which to base a partnership to jointly solve client problems.. "

mmmm... I think I'll start having some exploratory conversations with
the HR Leadership Team bout their knowledge challenges..

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@..., Patrick Lambe wrote:
>
> Hi Dale
>
> If you don't have common ground despite best efforts, then I don't
> see the definitional route having much value, even agreed
definitions
> tend to be only skin deep without a shared experience to ground
them in.
>
> So I'd suggest going with your last idea, of finding a common
KM/HR
> problem to work at together, and build a shared understanding from
> there. It would help if it was an HR pain point (which HR finds
> fairly intractable) where you can see KM adding some value.
>
> Best
>
> P
>
> Patrick Lambe
>
> weblog: www.greenchameleon.com
> website: www.straitsknowledge.com
> book: www.organisingknowledge.com
>
>


Mark D Neff <mneff@...>
 


Another thing we are working on that is an adjunct to this but has caused some overlap discussions with HR is an Authentic Leadership Maturity Model. By focusing on behaviors and values and assessments of people and teams against a pre-defined matrix along with establishing team purpose statements that include maturity level goals, we are looking at some things that many may consider HR domain. We are doing it because we see it as conducive to improving/accelerating business performance. The overlap with KM is that by creating an environment where authenticity is the goal, trust is nurtured and the desire and willingness to share knowledge is increased. Ultimately we are just trying to help people be true to themselves and become more of who they are, become energized and engaged, seek out meaningful work that aligns with their personal passions. One of the byproducts of this is that we have established regular "collaborative coaching" calls where we follow our intuition and discuss what specific things have happened in the previous week or what we need some help on in the following week where we have tried to be authentic and what problems we may have encountered with suggestions to work through the challenges. This way we can collectively benefit from the different things that people are trying. One example of this has made us add compassion to our list of values that needs to be considered. People can be authentic jerks and that is not what we want. Words have power and we need to be aware of their power and examine our intent when we are having discussions with others. It makes no sense for me to be authentic if what I say is going to blow everyone else at the table away. I need to invite them to be authentic too and recognize that each individual is at their own stage of development so I need to be sensitive enough to engage that person where they are and encourage them to develop without my ego getting in the way.

We have a ways to go but recognize that culture change takes time, one step at a time ...

Mark

Computer Sciences Corporation
Registered Office: 3170 Fairview Park Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, USA
Registered in Nevada, USA No: C-489-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



John Hovell
Sent by: sikmleaders@...

04/15/2008 09:54 PM

Please respond to
sikmleaders@...

To
sikmleaders@...
cc
Subject
Re: [sikmleaders] Re: Improving Collaboration with HR





This is an interesting conversation about HR and KM.  At ManTech, we've found some interesting common ground between HR's focus on "talent management" and our focus on enterprise KM.  As you are probably aware, talent mgmt is focused on topics such as recruiting/retention, assessment/evaluation, compensation/benefits, performance mgmt, learning/development and succession planning...  We're working on a number of collaborative projects in the areas of recruiting/retention, learning/development and succession planning.  Then, from the KM perspective, we're earning some HR help on our knowledge market and communities of practice initiatives...  In terms of trying to speak a common language (or at least some form of understanding), "ManTechpedia" is proving to be quite helpful... (which is just our internal enterprise version of wikipedia)

Is anyone working else working along those same lines?  Or did I miss the conversation completely here? :)

Thanks!
John

At 08:48 AM 4/15/2008, you wrote:

Thanks Patrick..

I'm beginning to see a trend in the comments..

"... work with HR as a client to solve their knowledge problems --
without definitions / labels -- and build their understanding of KM
in the process .. this will also build trust and a relationship upon
which to base a partnership to jointly solve client problems.. "

mmmm... I think I'll start having some exploratory conversations with
the HR Leadership Team bout their knowledge challenges..

Dale Arseneault

--- In sikmleaders@..., Patrick Lambe wrote:
>
> Hi Dale
>
> If you don't have common ground despite best efforts, then I don't
> see the definitional route having much value, even agreed
definitions
> tend to be only skin deep without a shared experience to ground
them in.
>
> So I'd suggest going with your last idea, of finding a common
KM/HR
> problem to work at together, and build a shared understanding from
> there. It would help if it was an HR pain point (which HR finds
> fairly intractable) where you can see KM adding some value.
>
> Best
>
> P
>
> Patrick Lambe
>
> weblog: www.greenchameleon.com
> website: www.straitsknowledge.com
> book: www.organisingknowledge.com
>
>