Topics

KM Project Management #pm


Murray Jennex
 

We've had a lot of discussions on issues that affect KM but I don't recall a discussion on managing KM projects.  I am also a PMP (as I believe many of you are) and in reviewing Chua and Lam's (2005) paper on why KM projects fail I noticed that one of their findings is that KM initiatives are still projects and need to be managed as projects.  Of course time passes and while I agree with their findings on project management for KM I think a couple of more issues come to play.  KM initiatives can also be programs and can be managed through project management's program management.  Also, many organizations, in an attempt to get repeatable project performance, use Project/Program Management Offices to guide groups of projects.  In this sense I'm looking at a KM P/PMO being a central group that guides the completion of all the projects and initiatives associated with creating a KM program including project management standards, technical expertise, promulgation of naming conventions, endorsing the use of KM standards, standardizing KM technologies and processes, ensuring KM aligns with organizational strategy, etc.

Okay, I've also noticed that this community has both consultants and practitioners in a specific organization.  So I have a couple of questions for both groups.  To be transparent I'm looking to curate this discussion (anonymizing all responses) to create a paper on KM project management.  So here are my questions:

We have organizations of all sizes represented on this forum so the first question is do the smaller organizations need more formal project management as suggested using a Project/Program Management Office?

Second, are larger organizations already using a P/PMO but perhaps under a different term, such as the KM office or KM manager?  Is this the role of KM consultants (or at some of the senior consultants)?

Would KM projects performance improve with a more centralized approach to managing them?

Are PM skills included in the KM skill set?

Does having PM experience figure into promotions for KM personnel?

What do you think of the idea of having a P/PMO?  I don't recall seeing this in the KM standards, should it be mentioned there?

Finally, would your KM initiatives be more successful with a P/PMO that interacts with top management, ensures strategic alignment, and collects and disseminate KM key performance indicator data to tell the story of how KM is helping the organization?

I did a similar study a few years ago looking at KM and security and if KM personnel needed more security skills (our findings were that we thought KM people definitely needed security skills but KM personnel recruiting, with the exception of defense organizations, did not value security skills)

I honestly have no preconceptions for this study but I will say that in my search on google scholar there is almost no research on this topic.

Feedback on all or any of the above questions is valued.  Comments about the topic are valued.  I will of course summarize the discussion and provide it back to the group.

Thanks....murray jennex


David Eddy
 

Murray -

>
I am also a PMP
>

In the context of what PMP brings to the table:

Do PMP deliverables include or mention creation of project glossaries?

__________________
David Eddy





Cindy Young
 

Murray,

I am also a PMP. I had a chapter published this April in the anthology "Project Management Strategies to Enhance Workflow and Productivity" called "Preventing Wastes of Project Costs and Schedules Using Purposeful Knowledge Management." Would this be helpful for what you are looking to accomplish? I have attached it for your use.

Regards,

Cindy

Dr. Cindy Young, PMP, LSSMBB, CMQ/OE
Founder/CEO
CJ Young Consulting, LLC
https://www.cjyoungconsulting.com/


Alice MacGillivray <alice@...>
 

Hello Murray. I’m not replying to your direct questions, but your post reminded me of a related story.

I was asked to be the keynote speaker to speak to KM projects at a PMI annual meeting. Many of the members were consultants, and many projects had a technical focus. My keynote was unconventional but ended up being very well received. A key point I was making is that with KM work, it can be easy to do a very good job with the wrong project.

In case details matter, I had talked with a community leader in advance to role play (as a tech consultant) with me as part of the presentation. In the first interchange, I was a senior manager describing field/head office communications issues, orienting him because of his expertise with a particular technology and trying to learn how that tech could help. Later, in a second role play, he is out in the field gathering more information about the communications issues, which ended up having little to do with technology.

Aside from warming up to the unlikely format, the feedback I got was on the topic of KM projects being complex and that it’s easy to make assumptions without enough context.

Alice


Murray Jennex
 

I wasn't listing all of what a PMP does or a PMO does but am hoping that through discussion we can define what a KM PMO/PMP should do.  I'll add project glossaries to the list, thanks!....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: David Eddy <deddy@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 1, 2020 6:12 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray -

>
I am also a PMP
>

In the context of what PMP brings to the table:

Do PMP deliverables include or mention creation of project glossaries?

__________________
David Eddy





Murray Jennex
 

thank you Cindy!  I will use and cite as appropriate!...murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Cindy Young <cjbutler97@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 1, 2020 7:59 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray,

I am also a PMP. I had a chapter published this April in the anthology "Project Management Strategies to Enhance Workflow and Productivity" called "Preventing Wastes of Project Costs and Schedules Using Purposeful Knowledge Management." Would this be helpful for what you are looking to accomplish? I have attached it for your use.

Regards,
Cindy

Dr. Cindy Young, PMP, LSSMBB, CMQ/OE
Founder/CEO
CJ Young Consulting, LLC
https://www.cjyoungconsulting.com/


Murray Jennex
 

Alice, I agree with you and your story is why I'm asking these questions and hoping to get a discussion started.  I think we all think we do a decent job of project management and I believe that we do, its just are we using all the tools PM brings to the table?  Communications is one, others I was thinking about from when I led a PMO are the value story telling, change management in the organization (easier from a PMO than from a single project), innovation coordination (for the same reason), standard and process setting, and the biggie: making sure we have the right knowledge being captured by ensuring strategic alignment, plus etc.  I think we are doing this in some organizations and hope to hear that we are.  I'm not trying to make KM more difficult than it needs to be nor more controlled than it needs to be.  Thanks Alice....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Alice MacGillivray <alice@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 1, 2020 8:47 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Hello Murray. I’m not replying to your direct questions, but your post reminded me of a related story.

I was asked to be the keynote speaker to speak to KM projects at a PMI annual meeting. Many of the members were consultants, and many projects had a technical focus. My keynote was unconventional but ended up being very well received. A key point I was making is that with KM work, it can be easy to do a very good job with the wrong project.

In case details matter, I had talked with a community leader in advance to role play (as a tech consultant) with me as part of the presentation. In the first interchange, I was a senior manager describing field/head office communications issues, orienting him because of his expertise with a particular technology and trying to learn how that tech could help. Later, in a second role play, he is out in the field gathering more information about the communications issues, which ended up having little to do with technology.

Aside from warming up to the unlikely format, the feedback I got was on the topic of KM projects being complex and that it’s easy to make assumptions without enough context.

Alice


Arthur Shelley
 

Hi Alice and Murray,

 

There are significant interdependencies between all the fields that you mention and “doing good KM” usually involves integrating all these tools well. I agree that many KMers do not have sufficient capabilities across enough of the relevant disciplines to make KM as effective as it could be. As Edward de Bono stated “EBNE” (Excellent, But Not Enough).  In order to enhance performance through knowledge Initiatives we to demonstrate leadership around strategic change by implementing action learning projects that are risk aware. This cocreates new knowledge and applies existing insights to generate capabilities resulting in sustained superior performance. It is not simple! In KNOWledge SUCCESSion I shared the image “The Performance Flower” (embedded/attached) which highlights the major areas that each knowledge professional should be combining in iterative strategic cycles. The second layer of petals behind the first meta-categories include communication, influence, social connections and networking, trust, respect, credibility and the list goes on and varies for each context. Any wonder what we need collaborative teams learning together, rather than a KM guru?

 

They key point is that in leading edge organisations, knowledge cocreation is informing business strategy creation (whereas in many KM programs are focused on “capturing” knowledge in response to a predetermined strategy).

Regards

Arthur Shelley

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)

Principal: www.IntelligentAnswers.com.au 

Founder: Organizational Zoo Ambassadors Network

Mb. +61 413 047 408  Skype: Arthur.Shelley  Twitter: @Metaphorage

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/arthurshelley/

Free behavioural profiles: www.organizationalzoo.com

Blog: www.organizationalzoo.com/blog

Creative-Melbourne-Banner_2018_Final_Smaller

 

 

From: SIKM@groups.io <SIKM@groups.io> On Behalf Of Murray Jennex via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, 2 July 2020 5:12 AM
To: alice@...; SIKM@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

 

Alice, I agree with you and your story is why I'm asking these questions and hoping to get a discussion started.  I think we all think we do a decent job of project management and I believe that we do, its just are we using all the tools PM brings to the table?  Communications is one, others I was thinking about from when I led a PMO are the value story telling, change management in the organization (easier from a PMO than from a single project), innovation coordination (for the same reason), standard and process setting, and the biggie: making sure we have the right knowledge being captured by ensuring strategic alignment, plus etc.  I think we are doing this in some organizations and hope to hear that we are.  I'm not trying to make KM more difficult than it needs to be nor more controlled than it needs to be.  Thanks Alice....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Alice MacGillivray <alice@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 1, 2020 8:47 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Hello Murray. I’m not replying to your direct questions, but your post reminded me of a related story.

 

I was asked to be the keynote speaker to speak to KM projects at a PMI annual meeting. Many of the members were consultants, and many projects had a technical focus. My keynote was unconventional but ended up being very well received. A key point I was making is that with KM work, it can be easy to do a very good job with the wrong project.

 

In case details matter, I had talked with a community leader in advance to role play (as a tech consultant) with me as part of the presentation. In the first interchange, I was a senior manager describing field/head office communications issues, orienting him because of his expertise with a particular technology and trying to learn how that tech could help. Later, in a second role play, he is out in the field gathering more information about the communications issues, which ended up having little to do with technology.

 

Aside from warming up to the unlikely format, the feedback I got was on the topic of KM projects being complex and that it’s easy to make assumptions without enough context.

 

Alice

 


Bruce Boyes
 

Hi Murray,

As you say there's not much research on this, so a very worthwhile study.

I think there are two aspects that can be considered. One is how knowledge is managed within projects, and the other is how project-based organisations can retain knowledge given that project teams are often temporary and largely made up of people hired just for a specific project. A PMO could assist with both aspects.

The only research I've found exploring the role of PMOs in KM is the thesis at http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/52291/?template=etheses

The University of Southern Queensland's research on their SyLLK model also offers some insights, see https://eprints.usq.edu.au/32822/

When exploring the potential role of PMOs, I think it's also useful to define the differences between project management and program management, for example as I do in this article.

Bruce.

Bruce Boyes
www.bruceboyes.info


Matt Moore <innotecture@...>
 

Murray,

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt


Murray Jennex
 

good points and insight Matt.

I'm talking about having a project or a program management office in charge of KM projects, however, I was wondering if the KM group or knowledge manager are providing the functions a PMO would provide.  I'm not trying to be confusing but I see a KM PMO as providing PM expertise, technology expertise, coordination, reporting, success story telling, etc. that KM projects need (just one PMO for all KM projects).  I'm not trying to suggest we need more management, but I am suggesting that PMOs do help organizations improve project performance.  Also, an organization can have as many PMOs as needed but I'm proposing KM use a single organization wide center of excellence PMO model to guide and provide oversight for all the various KM activities/projects.  And I agree with you that this in effect is a KM approach to project management so I'm proposing we put the KM into PM and in the process, put the PM into KM.

I've also been reviewing KM manager job postings and I'm seeing very little call for PM skills in candidates.  I find this odd as when I did research on KM manager job postings for security in 2014 I found that PM was the third most common skill requested in candidates.  This is also why I suspected that KM practitioners were using a PMO model but not calling it a PMO.  I was thinking that perhaps the KM consultants on this list were being hired to provide guidance and oversight like a PMO would.  And if that was the case, then I was thinking that we just needed to tweak the idea a little and embrace the PM terminology and perhaps more of the processes.  That said, I do apologize for being US focused with PMI but in my defense, PMI is a global organization and I have nothing against the European/UK approach.

Thanks....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore via groups.io <innotecture@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray, 

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt



Murray Jennex
 

Thanks Bruce! I hadn't thought to look for dissertations.  I also agree with you on defining differences between project management and program management especially for KM, as we of course have both projects and programs, mostly I think projects within a KM program which is why I was using P/PMO as many would go with project management office but really we would be doing a program management office that managed the project components and the other KM activities.....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Boyes via groups.io <bruceboyes@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 5:49 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Hi Murray,

As you say there's not much research on this, so a very worthwhile study.

I think there are two aspects that can be considered. One is how knowledge is managed within projects, and the other is how project-based organisations can retain knowledge given that project teams are often temporary and largely made up of people hired just for a specific project. A PMO could assist with both aspects.

The only research I've found exploring the role of PMOs in KM is the thesis at http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/52291/?template=etheses

The University of Southern Queensland's research on their SyLLK model also offers some insights, see https://eprints.usq.edu.au/32822/

When exploring the potential role of PMOs, I think it's also useful to define the differences between project management and program management, for example as I do in this article.

Bruce.

Bruce Boyes
www.bruceboyes.info


Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Murray,

I don't think it would necessarily be bad if executive-level KM operated like a PMO, but:

  (a) I see lots of pretty unhelpful PMO implementations in organisations, and
  (b) I don't think many CKOs or equivalent have enough organisational clout to operate at this PMO level

I'm seeing the average Knowledge Manager role being better described as a "Knowledge Process Manager". That is, rather than being tasked with leading a holistic / enterprise view of knowledge and how to improve it, the roles are targeted to a niche with a demonstrated knowledge need. This is typically a knowledgebase role for a service manager team or similar support for a high-knowledge reuse role (lawyers, domain-specific policy analysis, complex repairs).

This explains why we're seeing a decline in the call for PM skills, since the role is primarily BAU rather than project-based.

To be clear, I don't see this evolution in demand as a "bad" thing except for introducing further confusion in KM role naming - a "Knowledge Manager" can now describe anything from slightly above entry level professional roles right up to senior management positions.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 3/07/2020 12:52 pm, Murray Jennex via groups.io wrote:

good points and insight Matt.

I'm talking about having a project or a program management office in charge of KM projects, however, I was wondering if the KM group or knowledge manager are providing the functions a PMO would provide.  I'm not trying to be confusing but I see a KM PMO as providing PM expertise, technology expertise, coordination, reporting, success story telling, etc. that KM projects need (just one PMO for all KM projects).  I'm not trying to suggest we need more management, but I am suggesting that PMOs do help organizations improve project performance.  Also, an organization can have as many PMOs as needed but I'm proposing KM use a single organization wide center of excellence PMO model to guide and provide oversight for all the various KM activities/projects.  And I agree with you that this in effect is a KM approach to project management so I'm proposing we put the KM into PM and in the process, put the PM into KM.

I've also been reviewing KM manager job postings and I'm seeing very little call for PM skills in candidates.  I find this odd as when I did research on KM manager job postings for security in 2014 I found that PM was the third most common skill requested in candidates.  This is also why I suspected that KM practitioners were using a PMO model but not calling it a PMO.  I was thinking that perhaps the KM consultants on this list were being hired to provide guidance and oversight like a PMO would.  And if that was the case, then I was thinking that we just needed to tweak the idea a little and embrace the PM terminology and perhaps more of the processes.  That said, I do apologize for being US focused with PMI but in my defense, PMI is a global organization and I have nothing against the European/UK approach.

Thanks....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore via groups.io <innotecture@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray, 

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt



Murray Jennex
 

good insight, so, how is strategic KM alignment being done now?  and how are KM project execution performing?  I get the job description confusion as I was picking up on that also based on what I was seeing. So who is leading KM projects?  Is this a career path type advancement?  a consultant position?  a mix?  And could a central office, regardless of what you call it, that is of sufficient clout, help KM project performance?  I've seen a lot of discussions on this list that seemed to indicate that some central control/guidance is needed or would help.  I include in this setting KM technology standards, search standards, naming and ontology conventions, etc.  A KM PMO (lets say its a program management office) does focus on the strategic and being a center of excellence would also focus on making sure what works gets spread to all the KM program components....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Bounds <km@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 10:11 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Hi Murray,
I don't think it would necessarily be bad if executive-level KM operated like a PMO, but:
  (a) I see lots of pretty unhelpful PMO implementations in organisations, and
  (b) I don't think many CKOs or equivalent have enough organisational clout to operate at this PMO level
I'm seeing the average Knowledge Manager role being better described as a "Knowledge Process Manager". That is, rather than being tasked with leading a holistic / enterprise view of knowledge and how to improve it, the roles are targeted to a niche with a demonstrated knowledge need. This is typically a knowledgebase role for a service manager team or similar support for a high-knowledge reuse role (lawyers, domain-specific policy analysis, complex repairs).
This explains why we're seeing a decline in the call for PM skills, since the role is primarily BAU rather than project-based.
To be clear, I don't see this evolution in demand as a "bad" thing except for introducing further confusion in KM role naming - a "Knowledge Manager" can now describe anything from slightly above entry level professional roles right up to senior management positions.
Cheers,
Stephen.
====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 3/07/2020 12:52 pm, Murray Jennex via groups.io wrote:
good points and insight Matt.

I'm talking about having a project or a program management office in charge of KM projects, however, I was wondering if the KM group or knowledge manager are providing the functions a PMO would provide.  I'm not trying to be confusing but I see a KM PMO as providing PM expertise, technology expertise, coordination, reporting, success story telling, etc. that KM projects need (just one PMO for all KM projects).  I'm not trying to suggest we need more management, but I am suggesting that PMOs do help organizations improve project performance.  Also, an organization can have as many PMOs as needed but I'm proposing KM use a single organization wide center of excellence PMO model to guide and provide oversight for all the various KM activities/projects.  And I agree with you that this in effect is a KM approach to project management so I'm proposing we put the KM into PM and in the process, put the PM into KM.

I've also been reviewing KM manager job postings and I'm seeing very little call for PM skills in candidates.  I find this odd as when I did research on KM manager job postings for security in 2014 I found that PM was the third most common skill requested in candidates.  This is also why I suspected that KM practitioners were using a PMO model but not calling it a PMO.  I was thinking that perhaps the KM consultants on this list were being hired to provide guidance and oversight like a PMO would.  And if that was the case, then I was thinking that we just needed to tweak the idea a little and embrace the PM terminology and perhaps more of the processes.  That said, I do apologize for being US focused with PMI but in my defense, PMI is a global organization and I have nothing against the European/UK approach.

Thanks....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore via groups.io <innotecture@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray, 

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt



Daan Boom
 

Dear friends:
Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to  ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc. 

Regards and stay healthy

Daan


On Jul 3, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:


good points and insight Matt.

I'm talking about having a project or a program management office in charge of KM projects, however, I was wondering if the KM group or knowledge manager are providing the functions a PMO would provide.  I'm not trying to be confusing but I see a KM PMO as providing PM expertise, technology expertise, coordination, reporting, success story telling, etc. that KM projects need (just one PMO for all KM projects).  I'm not trying to suggest we need more management, but I am suggesting that PMOs do help organizations improve project performance.  Also, an organization can have as many PMOs as needed but I'm proposing KM use a single organization wide center of excellence PMO model to guide and provide oversight for all the various KM activities/projects.  And I agree with you that this in effect is a KM approach to project management so I'm proposing we put the KM into PM and in the process, put the PM into KM.

I've also been reviewing KM manager job postings and I'm seeing very little call for PM skills in candidates.  I find this odd as when I did research on KM manager job postings for security in 2014 I found that PM was the third most common skill requested in candidates.  This is also why I suspected that KM practitioners were using a PMO model but not calling it a PMO.  I was thinking that perhaps the KM consultants on this list were being hired to provide guidance and oversight like a PMO would.  And if that was the case, then I was thinking that we just needed to tweak the idea a little and embrace the PM terminology and perhaps more of the processes.  That said, I do apologize for being US focused with PMI but in my defense, PMI is a global organization and I have nothing against the European/UK approach.

Thanks....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore via groups.io <innotecture@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray, 

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt



Daan Boom
 

Dear friends:
Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and the voluminous book has other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc.

Regards and stay healthy

Daan


Daan


Chris Collison
 

On a light-hearted note (it is Friday after all), here's a version of 'Somethin' Stupid' which encapsulates the challenge that our labels (PM and KM) can sometimes get in the way...

https://www.chriscollison.com/blog/2010/02/25/somethin-stupid-pm-and-km


On 03/07/2020, 08:27, "Daan Boom" <daanboom@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear friends:
Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and the voluminous book has other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc.

Regards and stay healthy

Daan


Daan


Murray Jennex
 

yes Daan, the PMBOK is great for using KM to assist project management but I'm more focused on how to use project/program management to improve KM.


-----Original Message-----
From: Daan Boom <daanboom@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io
Cc: innotecture@... <innotecture@...>
Sent: Fri, Jul 3, 2020 12:24 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Dear friends:
Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to  ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc. 

Regards and stay healthy

Daan


On Jul 3, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:


good points and insight Matt.

I'm talking about having a project or a program management office in charge of KM projects, however, I was wondering if the KM group or knowledge manager are providing the functions a PMO would provide.  I'm not trying to be confusing but I see a KM PMO as providing PM expertise, technology expertise, coordination, reporting, success story telling, etc. that KM projects need (just one PMO for all KM projects).  I'm not trying to suggest we need more management, but I am suggesting that PMOs do help organizations improve project performance.  Also, an organization can have as many PMOs as needed but I'm proposing KM use a single organization wide center of excellence PMO model to guide and provide oversight for all the various KM activities/projects.  And I agree with you that this in effect is a KM approach to project management so I'm proposing we put the KM into PM and in the process, put the PM into KM.

I've also been reviewing KM manager job postings and I'm seeing very little call for PM skills in candidates.  I find this odd as when I did research on KM manager job postings for security in 2014 I found that PM was the third most common skill requested in candidates.  This is also why I suspected that KM practitioners were using a PMO model but not calling it a PMO.  I was thinking that perhaps the KM consultants on this list were being hired to provide guidance and oversight like a PMO would.  And if that was the case, then I was thinking that we just needed to tweak the idea a little and embrace the PM terminology and perhaps more of the processes.  That said, I do apologize for being US focused with PMI but in my defense, PMI is a global organization and I have nothing against the European/UK approach.

Thanks....murray

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Moore via groups.io <innotecture@...>
To: sikm@groups.io
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Project Management

Murray, 

The relationship between project management and knowledge management is an interesting one so thanks for bringing it up. I'm not really clear on your "KM PMO" - is it a separate PMO for KM projects? (if so are you proposing a PMO for each type of project  - e.g. KM, Finance, IT? that seems to go against the idea of a PMO in the first place) Or is it about applying KM to PPM activities? Or is it just about applying good PPM practices to KM projects? Or something else?

Here are some comments about the state of project management (which are from my experience - which may be different to others).

Project management is in a healthier state than knowledge management. Tho that isn't saying much. In my experience, most organisations are bad at managing projects overall (altho there is some data that implies that they have gotten better over the last 20 years). They are generally competent at their core operations - because that's what they do. Projects are always in competition in BAU activities and generally come off worse. There may be a PMO - altho in my experience, most PMOs neither have a remit across all an organisation's projects nor do they always wield any authority over projects (their role may simply be to provide project managers or to provide templates or advice).

Another point of issue is funding and staffing. Projects are generally staffed by contractors who exit at the end of the project - which has obvious knowledge transfer issues for moving to BAU. Many organisations try to mitigate this by involving BAU staff in the project - but this doesn't always work (because BAU is always more important than the project). 

Overall, most organisations could definitely manage their projects better. We know how to manage projects well (or at least better than we do currently). We just don't do what we should do. A PMO can help as a part of a systematic approach to improving project delivery but by itself it will be ineffective.

The exceptions to all this are: 1. organisations that do projects as their core business (consulting, construction) - altho there the tension is between external and internal projects and 2. projects that are existential for an organisation (typically these get sufficient executive attention to succeed).

There is also the "wars of religion" that go on in project management (which can confuse outsiders). The US has PMI/PMP/PMBOK and the UK/Europe has Prince2 (here in Australia we see both). And then there is "agile" (scrum! kanban!) vs "waterfall". The decision on how to structure a project often seems to be defined by either the background of the project manager or the budget cycle of the organisation rather than the best approach for the project.

The relationship between the PMO and KM is interesting. In my experience, a good PMO will do some kind of KM activity - although they may not call it that (lessons learned, retrospectives, etc). Some project-oriented organisations may even employee a KM person across their projects running these. However not all PMOs are "good".

My overall takeaways would be:
- KM practitioners benefit from having exposure to and experience in a variety of PPM approaches, frameworks and tools. Project management is both an important personal skill and organisational capability. Also - there are also more jobs in PPM than KM (at least here in Australia).
- Understanding how your KM projects are interdependent with each other - AND ALSO with other (non-KM) projects in the organisation - is important. A well-run PMO makes this easier to do. A well-run PMO will benefit an organisation more generally (a badly-run one probably won't).
- If there is already a PMO, having a separate KM PMO doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ensuring that KM works with the PMO to both further the KM agenda and embed good KM practices in PPM is a good idea. If there is no PMO, I guess having a "KM PMO" might make sense if you are running A LOT of KM projects.

In my experience, more KM folks (and indeed outside KM as well) have PPM skills than have Security skills.

Regards,

Matt



Murray Jennex
 

It is funny!  It also kind of makes my point, PM has incorporated KM processes into PM, but has KM incorporated PM practices into KM?  And its not the same thing.  It makes sense that KM can be used in PM to manage project knowledge and I teach my students that one of the main services a project or program management office offers is this KM, but I haven't really seen KM embrace PM in performing KM projects and I'm thinking that a PMO would be an asset to managing several KM projects and the KM program in the same organization....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Collison <chris.collison@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io <SIKM@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Jul 3, 2020 12:39 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Project management and KM

On a light-hearted note (it is Friday after all), here's a version of 'Somethin' Stupid' which encapsulates the challenge that our labels (PM and KM) can sometimes get in the way...

  https://www.chriscollison.com/blog/2010/02/25/somethin-stupid-pm-and-km


On 03/07/2020, 08:27, "Daan Boom" <daanboom@...> wrote:

    Dear friends:
    Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to  ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and the voluminous book has other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc.
   
    Regards and stay healthy
   
    Daan
   
   
    Daan
   
   
   
   





Arthur Shelley
 

Daan,

PMI BOK is a useful document for the transactional aspects of project management, but almost devoid of insights in the intangible aspects snd soft skills. It has very little pragmatic advice on building capabilities within a project or the benefits of a project beyond the project itself.

It may be a good guide if a knowledge professional want you learn how to MANAGE a project, but that is a VERY different thing from successfully engaging people in a knowledge creating initiative. Successful KM is largely about Stimulating the flow of knowledge through an organisation to create value (mostly in ongoing iterative cycles to inform strategy). PM (as guided by PMI PM BOK) is largely about focusing on “the Iron Triangle” of Time, Quality, Cost & Scope to deliver a predefined objective by controlling the whole process and then closing it off.

I argue that management is a convergent (Inward focused) mindset and behaviours, whereas a great KM program is much more divergent in character (see image). We need both of course, but many KM initiatives have too much management and insufficient leadership. Happy to share deeper thoughts on this off Forum.

Arthur Shelley
Founder, Intelligent Answers
Producer Creative Melbourne
www.OrganizationalZoo.com
@Metaphorage
+61 413 047 408
https://au.linkedin.com/pub/arthur-shelley/1/4bb/528 

On 3 Jul 2020, at 18:00, Murray Jennex via groups.io <murphjen@...> wrote:


It is funny!  It also kind of makes my point, PM has incorporated KM processes into PM, but has KM incorporated PM practices into KM?  And its not the same thing.  It makes sense that KM can be used in PM to manage project knowledge and I teach my students that one of the main services a project or program management office offers is this KM, but I haven't really seen KM embrace PM in performing KM projects and I'm thinking that a PMO would be an asset to managing several KM projects and the KM program in the same organization....murray


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Collison <chris.collison@...>
To: SIKM@groups.io <SIKM@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Jul 3, 2020 12:39 am
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Project management and KM

On a light-hearted note (it is Friday after all), here's a version of 'Somethin' Stupid' which encapsulates the challenge that our labels (PM and KM) can sometimes get in the way...

  https://www.chriscollison.com/blog/2010/02/25/somethin-stupid-pm-and-km


On 03/07/2020, 08:27, "Daan Boom" <daanboom@...> wrote:

    Dear friends:
    Maybe I overlooked this in the messages on this subject but I would like to draw your attention to  ‘A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE” or PMBOK of the Project Management Institute. To my knowledge the 6th edition is the latest version. The PMBOK has a chapter on KM (chapter 4.4) and the voluminous book has other related subjects e.g. communications, quality, risks, etc.
   
    Regards and stay healthy
   
    Daan
   
   
    Daan