KM - benefits and alignment with Social Media #value #social-media


pizzeyclaire <clairempizzey@...>
 

Hi - am looking for some statistics and tangigle benefits for KM/Collaboration programs to help in my discussions with clients. I am finidng a barrier to excite them in seeing the real value in KM. Also, how do you see KM and Social Media/Social CRM working together? Thanks


Robert Steele <robert.david.steele.vivas@...>
 

Disclosure:  I am a demanding end-user, not a KM data geek.

I'd like to point you to a graphic I created in the 1990's.

Graphic: Four Quadrants J-2 High Cell SMS Low

The bottom line is that Information Arbitrage (my term) is the conversion of information into intelligence (decision-support) and hence into profit, reduced costs, whatever.  Information costs money, intelligence makes money.

Where KM fails to inspire me is in its exaggerated emphasis on data mining and dashboards.  That just does not create the 360 situational awareness or early warning or delight the client kind of buzz that I would want if money mattered to me.

So KM per se is not a sales point.  What IS a sales point is the "knowledge-driven" enterprise, in which information, as Alvin Toffler suggested in PowerShift, is used as a substitute for time, space, labor, capital, and risk.  Hence the graphic.  It shows KM (quadrant I) in relation to the other three quadrants.

Where KM falls on its face, in my view as a skeptic of KM in isolation, is in its isolation from reality.  KM does not do "true cost" unless it is told do.  The energy companies have gotten away for decades with externalizing 75% of the true costs of production to the public and the future and the environment.  So KM that is out of touch with the social network, with external research, and with the ability to create and maintain organizational intelligence, is just bits and bytes....IMHO.

See also:

Review: The Leader’s Guide to Radical Management–Reinventing the Workplace for the 21st Century

Reference: The Next Revolution in Productivity

Review: Rethink–A Business Manifesto for Cutting Costs and Boosting Innovation


Review: Building a Knowledge-Driven Organization

Reference: Five Golden Rules for Data-Based Decisions



Richard Vines <plessons@...>
 

Claire,

Not sure about stats / tangible benefits and alignment with social media . In Australia there continue to be efforts to present a knowledge domain in various ways – a recent interesting example of a book about ‘knowledge brokering’ (– a free ebook) published by ANU Press. ‘Bridging the ‘Know–Do’ Gap: Knowledge brokering to improve child wellbeing . See http://epress.anu.edu.au/knowledge_citation.html.  The book is partially interesting because the content has emerged from those that do not really mix at all with the KM community locally.

 

Many people seem to continue to want to try and find various ways to build a profile and a value proposition. I said something (some said provocatively) about the same sort of thing at the most recent Melbourne KMLF meeting – 22nd Sept (I understand the power-point slide presentation should be available on their website sometime soon) http://www.melbournekmlf.org/

 

Remarkably - KMLF has served Victoria exceptionally well for over ten years now. Thanks to Arthur Shelley, Keith De La Rue and others for their current efforts.

 

 

 

 

Richard V

 



I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter.
SPAMfighter has removed 850 of my spam emails to date.

Do you have a slow PC? Try free scan!


Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
 

Claire –

 

I can’t give you any statistics, but I can give you a case study with three instances.

 

I’ve led three collaborative efforts involving true peer production (as opposed to typical committee work).  They involved developing a:

  • Access to Knowledge Policy
  • Knowledge Services Framework
  • Modeling Framework in a regulatory agency

 

In each case, there was no documented best practice that could be used as a model (at least that I was able to find).  The issues didn’t involve creating scientific knowledge, but rather eliciting tacit knowledge of experienced science managers.  In every instance, I feel that the result was at least twice as “good” as it would have been had only one person done the work.  In each case, the effort yielded a higher level of understanding of a previously undefined process as well as novel relationships that would not have emerged without the synergy of the group.  Describing the process paved the way to measurement which is a precursor to management.  Unfortunately, I can’t tell you the value of such results other than they were key to core agency processes.

 

Interestingly, I found that the same result could be achieved even when there was a significant gap between the group leader’s knowledge and that of the members (one of the above three cases).  In such a case, the leader has to listen very carefully to what is being said and unlike true peer production, in which anyone might come up with an answer to a problem, the onus falls more on the leader to figure out what’s really bothering someone who has a problem but can’t articulate it.  And it is important to get at the underlying problem rather than go for a majority vote.  It sometimes takes three of four tries to spiral in to the answer, which usually turns out to be incorrect logic or reasoning about the underlying process.  And you can recognize a good solution by the consensus-based aha! that permeates the group.

 

I’ve also participated in a group (not in the above list) that had all the right stuff going in (strong executive support and a chance to really change things) but that ended up as a typical committee that produced a typical report.  All it takes is one condescending, determined person with “Trust me, I know what I’m doing.”  Also, it is important to populate such groups with people who are comfortable in an unstructured environment (few and far between in government agencies).  Structured thinkers literally cannot function in an unstructured environment, while unstructured thinkers are bored to tears when bureaucrats insist that every I is dotted and T is crossed before moving forward.  

 

A few thoughts, for what they’re worth.

 

Albert J. Simard, Ph.D.

Knowledge Manager / Gestionnaire du savoir

 

Defence R&D Canada - / R&D pour la defense Canada

305 Rideau St., 9th floor - AH11 / 305 rue Rideau, 9 ieme etage -AH11

Ottawa, Ontatio K1A 0K2

Canada

Tel: 613-943-3501   Fax: 613-996-7063

e-mail: albert.simard@...

 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of pizzeyclaire
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 8:22 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KM - benefits and alignment with Social Media

 

 

Hi - am looking for some statistics and tangigle benefits for KM/Collaboration programs to help in my discussions with clients. I am finidng a barrier to excite them in seeing the real value in KM. Also, how do you see KM and Social Media/Social CRM working together? Thanks


Paul McDowall
 

Hi Claire,
I find that statistics aren't very convincing to anyone, and case stories of organization's derived benefits/value have to be relevant for the specific client you are talking to. You need to speak their language and that requires a good handle on their organization, their market/environment, and their direction. Even good examples or case stories may not be sufficient. I always try to focus on their greatest point of pain when talking to someone about value from KM. That's what gets their attention the most. If there isn't much they are struggling with or concerned about, then there won't likely be much interest in listening to you.
cheers
Paul

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, "pizzeyclaire" <clairempizzey@...> wrote:

Hi - am looking for some statistics and tangigle benefits for KM/Collaboration programs to help in my discussions with clients. I am finidng a barrier to excite them in seeing the real value in KM. Also, how do you see KM and Social Media/Social CRM working together? Thanks