How to learn about KM #KM101 #definition #certification #periodicals #learning
|
jean_graef <jean.graef@...>
One of our Canadian members is looking to educate herself about knowledge management and would like to know the following:
-- Is KM certification a practical way to learn about KM and a good career move? If so, what are the top-rated programs? -- What KM conferences do you recommend? This person is more interested in the collaboration as opposed to the repository side of KM. This list is a great resource in itself, but I wanted to give her other, more formalized sources as well. |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
Jean –
A few other thoughts –
Al Simard
From: sikmleaders@...
[mailto:sikmleaders@...] On
Behalf Of jean_graef
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:40 AM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: [sikmleaders] How to learn about KM
One of our Canadian members is looking to educate
herself about knowledge management and would like to know the following: |
|||
|
|
|||
|
--- Jean Graef wrote: See: Regards, |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Carl Frappaolo <cfraff@...>
have yet to see a job in Km that required certification.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...> wrote:
-- Carl Frappaolo Co-founder and Principal Information Architected, Inc. Ten Post Office Square Boston, MA 02109 617-933-2584 cf@... blog: www.takingaiim.com |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Sathya Pandalai <spandalai@...>
--- On Mon, 3/16/09, jean_graef wrote: From: jean_graef |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Certification may be a useful vehicle but my caution is that it does not replace experience. Unfortunately I have too often seen people use their certification credentials as a badge of expertise. If given the choice I would always chose a practitioner from the trenches who has tried and failed, over someone claiming expertise based on a formal curriculum.
Cheers Paul |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Kaplan, Bill <bill.kaplan@...>
Certification implies there is an accredited body of knowledge .. not sure there is one agreed upon..one would also need to know if the certification is accredited by a recognized accreditation authority…some things to consider
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf
Of Carl Frappaolo
have yet to see a job in Km that required certification. On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
wrote:
Jean –
A few other thoughts –
Al Simard
From: sikmleaders@...
[mailto:sikmleaders@...]
On Behalf Of jean_graef
One of our Canadian members is looking to educate
herself about knowledge management and would like to know the following:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Lee, Jim <jlee@...>
Bill Kaplan’s observation that a single body of knowledge does not yet exist for KM is an important one. Certification would imply a level of competence in KM that is widely accepted. In fact, the mere existence of multiple KM certifications is likely more harmful than helpful to those interested in learning about the field and then desiring to apply that knowledge professionally.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Kaplan, Bill <bill.kaplan@...>
I would also suggest that it is important to distinguish between “certification for competence” and “certification to sell training”..they are different. I have always believed that the best “certification” is from practicing KM in a business environment while delivering measurable value at the bottom line…
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf
Of Lee, Jim
Bill Kaplan’s observation that a single body of knowledge does not yet exist for KM is an important one. Certification would imply a level of competence in KM that is widely accepted. In fact, the mere existence of multiple KM certifications is likely more harmful than helpful to those interested in learning about the field and then desiring to apply that knowledge professionally.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Experiential learning is an essential part of being a successful knowledge
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
leader - preferably broad experiences across multiple disciplines (including HR/capability development, project management, strategy, finance, behavioural understanding/EQ, reflective practice and future focused improvement). Theoretical/classroom can assist in broadening, but to make a difference a knowledge practitioner has to ultimately apply these learnings and their experiences in their own context. I don't believe that we can certify a "Knowledge manager program" as the basis of a competency, but we can observe who is effective at achieving success in knowledge based programs. Many of these people have not arrived at their success through KM education - most have come to KM leadership positions through other disciplines and a particular style and passion for creating the right behaviors and environment which fosters the application of knowledge principles (like Bill has done at Acquisition Solutions, John at Fluor, Raj at Mindtree and Amit at Tata). Regards Arthur Shelley Author: The Organizational Zoo, A Survival Guide to Workplace Behavior and Being a Successful Knowledge Leader, What knowledge practitioners need to know to make a difference (March 2009) www.organizationalzoo.com Ph +61 413 047 408 -----Original Message-----
From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Kaplan, Bill Sent: Wednesday, 25 March 2009 10:49 PM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] Re: How to learn about KM I would also suggest that it is important to distinguish between "certification for competence" and "certification to sell training"..they are different. I have always believed that the best "certification" is from practicing KM in a business environment while delivering measurable value at the bottom line. William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc. (w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878 "Knowledge at Work" The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer. From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Lee, Jim Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 07:44 To: sikmleaders@... Subject: [sikmleaders] Re: How to learn about KM Bill Kaplan's observation that a single body of knowledge does not yet exist for KM is an important one. Certification would imply a level of competence in KM that is widely accepted. In fact, the mere existence of multiple KM certifications is likely more harmful than helpful to those interested in learning about the field and then desiring to apply that knowledge professionally. Jim Lee, PMP APQC 123 North Post Oak Lane Houston, TX 77024 O: +1.713.893.7790 C: +1.216.338.3548 email: jlee@... Yahoo, AOL, Skype IM: jimpmp2000 Windows Live Messenger: jimleesr@... <mailto:jimleesr@...> text messaging: 2163383548@... No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.25/2019 - Release Date: 03/25/09 07:16:00 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
A couple of additional thoughts.
A standard body of knowledge does not yet exist because KM is still in the process of becoming, of inventing itself. We are still experimenting with what works and what doesn’t. I expect that it will take an additional decade or two for KM settle down and define itself. Looking to our predecessor field, it took 2-3 decades for IM to define itself. We’re broader and more complex, so why should we expect things to go any quicker.
In addition, a philosophical question. It is unlikely that a single one-size-fits-all definition of KM can be developed because any definition of KM has to be relevant to the context in which it is applied (e.g., business, academia, government, social networks) to be useful. And knowledge is all about diversity; it is about stubbornly resisting classification (to the considerable consternation of bureaucracies that need to pigeon-hole all things within their purview. In my opinion, it is still much too early to consider certification.
Al Simard
From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Kaplan, Bill
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 7:49 AM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] Re: How to learn about KM
I would also suggest that it is important to distinguish between “certification for competence” and “certification to sell training”..they are different. I have always believed that the best “certification” is from practicing KM in a business environment while delivering measurable value at the bottom line…
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From: sikmleaders@
Bill Kaplan’s observation that a single body of knowledge does not yet exist for KM is an important one. Certification would imply a level of competence in KM that is widely accepted. In fact, the mere existence of multiple KM certifications is likely more harmful than helpful to those interested in learning about the field and then desiring to apply that knowledge professionally.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Murray Jennex
I admit I'm more of an academic member of this list but I have to disagree
that KM does not have a body of knowledge. I am the editor in chief of the
International Journal of Knowledge Management and I co-lead a track focused on
KM Systems at one of the top academic IS conferences, the Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences. I see a lot of the KM research that is
being done, and publish (enen write some) much of it. One of the goals of
my journal is to define and develop the KM discipline.
First, I do believe we are a discipline that is separate from Information
Systems and other disciplines. To be a discipline we need to have a body
of knowledge, active research, journals, conferences, and interesting
questions.
I believe we have a small body of knowledge, but is growing. We have
this body of knowledge in areas like knowledge transfer, KM success, KM Systems,
knowledge discovery, ontologies, communities of practice, what is knowledge,
etc. This body is growing and developing but we do have accepted theories
from it, SECI, KM Success based off of DeLone and McLean's IS Success Model,
Critical Success Factors, KM Acceptance, KM Readiness, etc.
I also think we have a good working definition of KM (I derived this from a
panel of KM researchers):
KM is the practice of selectively applying knowledge from previous experiences of decision-making to current and future decision making activities with the express purpose of improving the organization’s effectiveness. KM is really about two issues:
• Leveraging what the organization “knows” so that it can better utilize its knowledge assets, and • Connecting knowledge generators, holders, and users to facilitate the flow of knowledge through the organization This definition focuses on what we are trying to do, improve decision
making, as well as what technologies we are looking at: those that help with
capturing, storing, searching, retrieving, manipulating knowledge and those that
help us network or connect knowledge workers.
This may not be all inclusive in what we do but I think almost everything
(and I can't really think of something that doesn't fit in the definition, just
allowing for it) fits in to achieving the above.
That said, perhaps the problem is that we aren't doing a good job of moving
what the researchers are finding out to what the practitioners are doing and
needing and of course getting the interaction necessary to refine it to where we
all agree on it.
I don't like to make long posts so will stop, but I do intend to post a
list of resources that we are using in research and teaching KM later.
Thanks...murray jennex
Murray E. Jennex, Ph.D., P.E., CISSP, CSSLP
San Diego State University
Editor in Chief International Journal of Knowledge Management
Co-editor in Chief International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis
Response and Management
President, Foundation for Knowledge Management Great Deals on Dell 15" Laptops - Starting at $479 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Kaplan, Bill <bill.kaplan@...>
yep
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf
Of Simard, Albert
A couple of additional thoughts.
A standard body of knowledge does not yet exist because KM is still in the process of becoming, of inventing itself. We are still experimenting with what works and what doesn’t. I expect that it will take an additional decade or two for KM settle down and define itself. Looking to our predecessor field, it took 2-3 decades for IM to define itself. We’re broader and more complex, so why should we expect things to go any quicker.
In addition, a philosophical question. It is unlikely that a single one-size-fits-all definition of KM can be developed because any definition of KM has to be relevant to the context in which it is applied (e.g., business, academia, government, social networks) to be useful. And knowledge is all about diversity; it is about stubbornly resisting classification (to the considerable consternation of bureaucracies that need to pigeon-hole all things within their purview. In my opinion, it is still much too early to consider certification.
Al Simard
From: sikmleaders@...
[mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Kaplan, Bill
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 7:49 AM To: sikmleaders@... Subject: RE: [sikmleaders] Re: How to learn about KM
I would also suggest that it is important to distinguish between “certification for competence” and “certification to sell training”..they are different. I have always believed that the best “certification” is from practicing KM in a business environment while delivering measurable value at the bottom line…
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From: sikmleaders@...
[mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Lee, Jim
Bill Kaplan’s observation that a single body of knowledge does not yet exist for KM is an important one. Certification would imply a level of competence in KM that is widely accepted. In fact, the mere existence of multiple KM certifications is likely more harmful than helpful to those interested in learning about the field and then desiring to apply that knowledge professionally.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Murray Jennex
Matt,
Thank you for the response, I suspect in some ways we are kindred
spirits.
I'm attaching a keynote address I made at ACKMIDS, the Australian
Conference on Knowledge Management and Intelligent Decision Support in December,
2006. It specifically addresses the gap between academics and
practitioners and suggests an approach to resolve it.
I will make this offer to all on this list: my journal, International
Journal of Knowledge Management actually seeks out practitioner articles.
I look for experience reports, case studies, etc. I don't expect these
articles to fit the academic rigor presentation model, but do want them to be
thorough. Please feel free to send me articles and I will work with you to
get them published. I tend to do one maybe two an issue.
Also, thanks for mentioning Hawaii and HICSS. While Keith may need to
do more homework, my track features the following minitracks and I think it is
striving to bridge the academic-practitioner gap. This conference also
includes practitioner papers and has very good discussion with the
presentations
* KM in a Changing Society: Retirement, Contingent Workers,
Immigration and
Other Societal Impacts * KM in a Multinational Context * Knowledge Evolution: Methods and Measures for Organizational Learning * Knowledge Flows, Transfer, Sharing and Exchange In Organizations * Knowledge Management for Creativity and Innovation * Knowledge Management/Organizational Memory Success and Performance Measurements * Knowledge-Intensive Business Processes * Web 2.0/3.0 Technologies, Mashups, KM Tools, & KMS Design Approaches the link for this conference is www.hicss.org, the next conference is HICSS 43
next January. Feel free to contact me if you have
questions....murray
In a message dated 3/25/2009 3:10:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
laalgadger@... writes:
Great Deals on Dell 15" Laptops - Starting at $479 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Matt Moore <laalgadger@...>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Murray Jennex
I can do a special issue, or, start an ongoing conversation through many
issues (probably my preference due to getting enough good articles at one time,
but then, I'm easy and go either way).
I do have a question, what do you mean by evidence based KM? I see
this as KM research that is looking primarily at actual KM in use. By this
I mean action or case based KM research and I totally agree with that approach
to discover what is working and what isn't. Of course, the quantitative
approach of using a survey over many subjects would be needed once we discover
something that does work. This is to make sure it is applicable over many
different contexts, or, to discover the limits of the contexts it is applicable
to.
Am I close to what you are thinking? thanks...murray
In a message dated 3/25/2009 4:18:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
laalgadger@... writes:
Great Deals on Dell 15" Laptops - Starting at $479 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Matt Moore <laalgadger@...>
Murray,
Links between Academics & Practioners We had a big debate about this on the actKM list a few months ago (with the most incisive comments made by a certain P Lambe). I did a short presentation at the RAILS5 event at the end of Jan: http://www.hss.uts.edu.au/conferences/rails/ Here is the presso: http://www.slideshare.net/engineerswithoutfears/change-the-world-1198575 I was (in effect) arguing for an evidence-based approach to knowledge management that linked academia & practitioners. Everyone applauded and told me how great the presentation was but the truth was that I had failed miserably. No one wanted to do anything about it. Hawaii I have heard about Hawaii but I think that Keith Sawyer needs to do his homework first: http://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/managing-knowledge-for-innovation/ Cheers, Matt |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Kaplan, Bill <bill.kaplan@...>
Murray
I would agree that we have an evolving body of knowledge..I would also suggest that involving practitioners in addition to researchers and academia is essential in developing any working definition of KM or in understanding how KM can be effectively applied in solving real world business problems..that’s the real vale in KM…for what stands out for me is the actual application of KM in improving performance that drives the lasting meaning and value of the KM discipline…my thoughts
Thanks
Bill
William S. Kaplan, CPCM Chief Knowledge Officer Acquisition Solutions, Inc.
(w) 703.253.6313 (c) 571.238.9878
"Knowledge at Work"
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message, and then delete it from your computer.
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf
Of murphjen@...
I admit I'm more of an academic member of this list but I have to disagree that KM does not have a body of knowledge. I am the editor in chief of the International Journal of Knowledge Management and I co-lead a track focused on KM Systems at one of the top academic IS conferences, the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. I see a lot of the KM research that is being done, and publish (enen write some) much of it. One of the goals of my journal is to define and develop the KM discipline.
First, I do believe we are a discipline that is separate from Information Systems and other disciplines. To be a discipline we need to have a body of knowledge, active research, journals, conferences, and interesting questions.
I believe we have a small body of knowledge, but is growing. We have this body of knowledge in areas like knowledge transfer, KM success, KM Systems, knowledge discovery, ontologies, communities of practice, what is knowledge, etc. This body is growing and developing but we do have accepted theories from it, SECI, KM Success based off of DeLone and McLean's IS Success Model, Critical Success Factors, KM Acceptance, KM Readiness, etc.
I also think we have a good working definition of KM (I derived this from a panel of KM researchers):
KM is the practice of selectively applying knowledge from previous experiences of decision-making to current and future decision making activities with the express purpose of improving the organization’s effectiveness. KM is really about two issues:
• Leveraging what the organization “knows” so that it can better utilize its knowledge assets, and • Connecting knowledge generators, holders, and users to facilitate the flow of knowledge through the organization
This definition focuses on what we are trying to do, improve decision making, as well as what technologies we are looking at: those that help with capturing, storing, searching, retrieving, manipulating knowledge and those that help us network or connect knowledge workers.
This may not be all inclusive in what we do but I think almost everything (and I can't really think of something that doesn't fit in the definition, just allowing for it) fits in to achieving the above.
That said, perhaps the problem is that we aren't doing a good job of moving what the researchers are finding out to what the practitioners are doing and needing and of course getting the interaction necessary to refine it to where we all agree on it.
I don't like to make long posts so will stop, but I do intend to post a list of resources that we are using in research and teaching KM later. Thanks...murray jennex
Murray E. Jennex, Ph.D., P.E., CISSP, CSSLP San Diego State University Editor in Chief International Journal of Knowledge Management Co-editor in Chief International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management President, Foundation for Knowledge Management
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Matt Moore <laalgadger@...>
--- On Wed, 3/25/09, murphjen@... wrote: From: murphjen@... |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Matt Moore <laalgadger@...>
--- On Wed, 3/25/09, murphjen@... wrote: From: murphjen@... |
|||
|
|