A reflection on the value of the ISO KM Standard #ISO-KM-Standard
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Stan and Knowledge Professionals,
Thanks for sharing insights from your ISO 3040 call. I am pleased that there is growing constructive conversation about the importance of the ISO KM standard. Despite a diverse set of reactions to the release of ISO30401, the standard is recognition of the importance of Knowledge Management as a support to individual, team, organisation (and Global) performance. The whole KM community will benefit from the independent acknowledgement that knowledge IS a critical factor across management systems (and becoming more so as we are now well into the “Knowledge Economy”). ISO do not release standards randomly – they ONLY develop standards that they know will make a difference for industry, based on solid research across many countries. This is a VERY solid argument for proposing KM initiatives into senior management (I.E. not just the knowledge professional arguing for their job preferences and opinions – ISO30401 is formal international demonstration that knowledge initiatives are a critical element of high performance).
The standard provides guidance on WHAT should be done to secure the benefits of better management of knowledge assets, but not the specific way in which to achieve this (because this will vary with each organisation, situation and desired priority outcomes). However, the two books mentioned in your links provide useful guidance for practitioners on HOW to achieve best outcomes. The authors have all been around for a long time and share insights and practical experiences on how it works best.
I am very confident that wide adoption of the standard will elevate the performance expectations of whole industries - just as the ISO 9000 Quality standard did in 1990’s (after the initial troublesome period where some organisations tried to inappropriately leverage it for short term gain by “getting certification” for marketing purposes, but not actually making the changes for longer term strategic performance improvement). Just as applying the principles of quality management changed everything, so too will adoption of ISO 30401 (along with integration of other Management Systems Standards like ISO 44001 Collaboration and ISO 56000 Innovation).
Like any useful knowledge asset - do it for the right reasons and there will be sustained benefits, including both tangible outputs and intangible outcomes. Try to pretend that the organisation is “certified” for “market image” without the elevated mindset and commitment to the principles of the standard and there will be no real value. Paying a Gym membership and documenting an exercise plan is not where the benefits come from - it is doing the exercise that generates the value!
Producer: Creative Melbourne
Author: KNOWledge SUCCESSion Sustained performance and capability growth through knowledge projects
Earlier Books: The Organizational Zoo (2007) & Being a Successful Knowledge Leader (2009)
Mb. +61 413 047 408 Skype: Arthur.Shelley Twitter: @Metaphorage
Free behavioural profiles: www.organizationalzoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, 16 October 2019 3:39 AM
Subject: [sikmleaders] Oct 15 SIKM Call: Nick Milton on the ISO KM Standard
TO: SIKM Leaders Community
Today we held our 170th monthly call. Here are the details:
· ISO 30401:2018 Knowledge management systems - Requirements https://www.iso.org/standard/68683.html
· The Knowledge Manager's Handbook: A Step-by-Step Guide to Embedding Effective Knowledge Management in your Organization, 2nd Edition by Nick Milton and Patrick Lambe https://www.koganpage.com/product/the-knowledge-manager-s-handbook-9780749484606
· The KM Cookbook: Stories and strategies for organisations exploring Knowledge Management Standard ISO30401 by Chris Collison, Paul Corney, and Patricia Lee Eng https://www.iso30401.com/
Thanks to Nick for presenting, to Paul Corney for the update on certification, to Linda Hummel for her questions, and to those who attended. Please continue the discussion in the Yahoo! Group by replying to this thread.
Matt Moore <innotecture@...>
Arthur,toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I am going to respectfully offer a different point of view. Let me start by saying that I think the content of the standard is fine and that I recognize the work the committee (including yourself) has put into it is significant.
I just don’t think it will have that big an impact. Most management standards don’t. I would venture that apart from the ISO 9000 series, most managers could not name any even if they had a gun to their head (N.B. engineering standards in specific industries are different).
I think it wouldn’t hurt knowledge managers to read the standard (N.B. If an organization is paying for it then fine. But standards are short and expensive documents for the casual reader). I am sure that some of the ancillary materials (e.g. the cookbook) will be useful (and hopefully more affordable).
But for most people undertaking knowledge management work (who will rarely be called knowledge managers these days), the standard will have little impact on their success or failure. They are better focused on understanding the broader trends impacting their organization and how their skills and resources can assist with those.
Some of the rhetoric around the standard seems overblown to me.
+61 423 784 504
On Oct 16, 2019, at 10:58 AM, 'Arthur Shelley' arthur@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
I agree with Matt,
While I respect the level of effort put forward to develop a standard, I don't foresee much concrete impact in the leadership ranks of the many organizations that I've done work with and been associated with, especially in the federal government space. There's a dearth of understanding about leadership and management disciplines, including its foundations and standards. As an example, I often asked senior leaders if they had ever heard of Peter Drucker - nope - or of any of the key international standards - nope. I attended leadership development courses and there was no mention of standards or resources for further exploration of management disciplines. In the same way there's also been virtually no indication of certification being a requirement for work.
My suspicion is that highly regulated industry sectors (such as Nuclear energy sector organizations that I've worked with) may have some possibility of adapting the standards into their own set of management frameworks but that would still be questionable and only part of a long-term process.
While this is the case for federal government agencies and the nuclear industry, I obviously cannot speak for other industry sectors.