March 2019 SIKM Call: Patrick Lambe - Knowledge Audits #monthly-call #maturity #audit


Stan Garfield
 

This is a reminder of tomorrow's monthly call from 11 am to 12 noon EDT.

SIKM Leaders Community Monthly Call

Reply
Delete



Matt Moore <innotecture@...>
 

Hi,

I will probably miss this but I am looking forward to listening to the recording. I am looking forward to the book even more. From the little that I have seen, it mixes Patrick's trademark philosophical depth, practical nous, and dry wit. He takes the greyest of subjects and makes them compelling.His next book will doubtless be "Watching Paint Dry: A Knowledge Perspective" and it will still be damn good.

Regards,

Matt

On Tuesday, 19 March 2019, 12:13:15 am AEDT, stangarfield@... [sikmleaders] wrote:


 

This is a reminder of tomorrow's monthly call from 11 am to 12 noon EDT.

SIKM Leaders Community Monthly Call

Reply
Delete



Stan Garfield
 
Edited

TO: SIKM Leaders Community

Today we held our 163rd monthly call. Here are the details:
Thanks to Patrick for presenting and to everyone who participated in the conversation. Please continue the discussion by replying to this thread.


Connie Crosby
 

A bit of stream-of-consciousness follow-up thoughts from the Patrick's talk:

I thought it was fascinating that we are all likely talking about different things when we talk about knowledge audits. This means when we are discussing this idea, we need to take care and specify what we mean, including in our discussions here. I also quite like the idea of creating a common method and instrument when doing similar types of audits in a particular industry so that comparisons can be made. I am thinking about the logistics of this. 

This also makes me wonder what other terminology we are all using where we may be talking about different things. It is a good idea to specify when you are talking about a method, framework, etc. so that everyone is on the same page. Even if everyone has expertise in the area. I do find in an area where people specialize, there is an assumption that everyone should know a certain base level of information. But Patrick's talk has shown me that may not be the case, and we cannot assume this. 

This is why I will sometimes ask the "stupid" questions in a meeting that no one else will ask: What does that acronym stand for? Can you please explain what you mean by that term? Who is that author you just referred to? Even if I already know the answer, I cringe thinking half the people in the room do not, but feel too intimidated to ask. Sometimes people are confused why I would ask these questions when presumably I know the answers. 

This reminds me of a recent meeting I attended with some local KM practitioners. One of our group started talking about something he was doing, assuming we all knew where he worked and what his project was about. There were several new people in the room. So I asked the stupid questions: please back up and tell us where you are now, and what this project is? One of the other regulars in the room turned to look at me, and said to me "You're joking, right?"  In other words, this is something we should all know and there should be no explanation needed. I can't think of a better way of intimidating someone new to a group than to dissuade questions. 

The truth is we do not all know everything. Newcomers certainly will not know everything. And even those of us with expertise may not know exactly what you are talking about. 

Most of these thoughts are a digression from the talk. Worth a listen to hear about the various forms a knowledge audit can take! 

Thank you,
Connie

Connie Crosby
Crosby Group Consulting
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
416-919-6719 | connie@... | http://twitter.com/conniecrosby

My new blog just launched! https://www.conniecrosby.com


Patrick Lambe
 

Connie - thank you for this! I was just reflecting the other day on the value to communities and teams of “stupid questions” - in a very different context, and I think you have it exactly right in this context too - that if we’re open to asking and answering apparently “stupid” questions we are also making sure that we are revealing the assumptions behind what’s being shared, and this can only help the quality of the sharing, especially when there is a risk of talking at cross purposes.

I think this is an acquired skill - as well as involving a bit of courage. And I agree we should encourage more than discourage this.

P

Patrick Lambe
Partner
+65 62210383



twitter: @plambesg

Knowledge mapping made easy: www.aithinsoftware.com

On 21 Mar 2019, at 1:31 AM, Connie Crosby conniecrosby@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:


A bit of stream-of-consciousness follow-up thoughts from the Patrick's talk:

I thought it was fascinating that we are all likely talking about different things when we talk about knowledge audits. This means when we are discussing this idea, we need to take care and specify what we mean, including in our discussions here. I also quite like the idea of creating a common method and instrument when doing similar types of audits in a particular industry so that comparisons can be made. I am thinking about the logistics of this. 

This also makes me wonder what other terminology we are all using where we may be talking about different things. It is a good idea to specify when you are talking about a method, framework, etc. so that everyone is on the same page. Even if everyone has expertise in the area. I do find in an area where people specialize, there is an assumption that everyone should know a certain base level of information. But Patrick's talk has shown me that may not be the case, and we cannot assume this. 

This is why I will sometimes ask the "stupid" questions in a meeting that no one else will ask: What does that acronym stand for? Can you please explain what you mean by that term? Who is that author you just referred to? Even if I already know the answer, I cringe thinking half the people in the room do not, but feel too intimidated to ask. Sometimes people are confused why I would ask these questions when presumably I know the answers. 

This reminds me of a recent meeting I attended with some local KM practitioners. One of our group started talking about something he was doing, assuming we all knew where he worked and what his project was about. There were several new people in the room. So I asked the stupid questions: please back up and tell us where you are now, and what this project is? One of the other regulars in the room turned to look at me, and said to me "You're joking, right?"  In other words, this is something we should all know and there should be no explanation needed. I can't think of a better way of intimidating someone new to a group than to dissuade questions. 

The truth is we do not all know everything. Newcomers certainly will not know everything. And even those of us with expertise may not know exactly what you are talking about. 

Most of these thoughts are a digression from the talk. Worth a listen to hear about the various forms a knowledge audit can take! 

Thank you,
Connie

Connie Crosby
Crosby Group Consulting
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
416-919-6719 | connie@... | http://twitter.com/conniecrosby

My new blog just launched! https://www.conniecrosby.com