Date
1 - 11 of 11
KM Reporting Structure - Typical or Best Practice #governance
|
Sandra Willis
Hi All,
I was wondering what others experience or have learned as a best practice (if that really can exist given organizations or often so different) in terms of the reporting structure for knowledge management. Overall I have experienced KM having no greater level than Director and reporting into either a Digital/IT department or local Business Unit Leader dedicated, and sometimes rotating. I will share my experiences: 1. CPG company - highest level in KM was a Senior Manager - reporting to a rotating non-information professional VP embedded at the local business unit
2. CPG company - highest level in KM was a Director - reporting to a VP in a Data & Digital Solutions role
3. Law Firm - highest level in KM was Department Head - reporting to Director of IT
4. Pharmaceutical - highest level was local KM/Information Center Head - reported into multi-information center Director
Thank you, Sandra |
|
|
|
There was a time CKO was in fashion, giving the KM function a seat at the C-suite table. That ship may or may not have sailed. Haven't looked in some time. Some orgs put KM under HR or People Management as a director or even VP, which can be a better place than the IT function depending on how people-centric the company is. There was a time that R&D functions had KM reporting in to an R&D head, which makes a lot of sense. A lot of this is highly dependent on the industry/type of business and then on the company itself.
Tom Short Consulting All of my previous SIKM Posts |
|
|
|
Barbara Fillip
Hi Sandra, For a while (almost 10 years), I've worked as a contractor under a CKO who reported directly to a Center Director (NASA Center). NASA still has multiple CKOs, one for each NASA center and some others for major departments at headquarters I think. There is some interesting history there around the evolution of KM at NASA and the emergence of CKOs. I'm now in a different industry where I'm the lead for an enterprise-level KM team of two, reporting to a Senior VP. The rest of our KM staff is distributed along technical knowledge domains and does not report to me as they are embedded in business lines. It's possible to experience significant change in the reporting and titles even within a short period of time within a single organization. In the past 3.5 years, I have been a Director and now Senior Advisor for KM. I started in a team that included Knowledge, Innovation, and Technology (not IT). I've reported to the Senior VP of a division that combined project management support, corporate training, KM and data analytics, among other things. And for a while I reported directly to the CEO in an Executive Office team that included things like innovation, data analytics, KM, and strategic communications, then back to the other division. When I'm in a good mood (like today), I see each organizational change as an opportunity to do some KM proselytizing with new teams, spreading the word far and wide across the organization by moving around. :) I don't anticipate we would ever have a CKO, but I can imagine things being reorganized to adjust to evolving corporate strategies. Throughout these organizational changes, there has been steady support for KM as part of a bigger vision for the company's future. That being said, I must admit that on a day-to-day basis, trying to stay the course and continue to build strong KM foundations, regardless of the name of the team or the reporting structure, is not an easy task. Even when the organizational structure is stable, the people might change, and that is sometimes more challenging than adjusting to different team configurations and team names. Finally, even though I am glad not to be leading a KM team under the IT Division, my most constant and stable collaborators have been in the IT department. Best regards, Barbara Fillip On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 5:43 PM Sandra Willis <Sandra.Willis@...> wrote: Hi All, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've worked in partnership organisations, and for 80% of the time, reported into an influential partner.
By it's nature, KM is a multi-discplinary trade, so there is no perfect home. Whilst seniority is important (e.g. somebody is able to represent you/bring you in at high level when you need it), the key characteristic is their level of interest, understanding, and belief in what you are doing. If your agenda is as important as theirs in their minds eye, they will make what you need happen, and find the resources you need. |
|
|
|
Nick Milton
You can find the results of a survey question on this topic (answered by 745 people) here
http://www.nickmilton.com/2022/08/whats-best-reporting-line-for-km.html
Nick Milton
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sandra Willis
Sent: 04 October 2022 22:43 To: main@SIKM.groups.io Subject: [SIKM] KM Reporting Structure - Typical or Best Practice
Hi All, 1. CPG company - highest level in KM was a Senior Manager - reporting to a rotating non-information professional VP embedded at the local business unit 2. CPG company - highest level in KM was a Director - reporting to a VP in a Data & Digital Solutions role 3. Law Firm - highest level in KM was Department Head - reporting to Director of IT 4. Pharmaceutical - highest level was local KM/Information Center Head - reported into multi-information center Director
|
|
|
|
See additional replies in the Twitter thread and the LinkedIn thread.
|
|
|
|
This does interest me. I have a view that KM is it's own functional area, but I can at least share the headlines of my experience of different reporting lines as Head of KM.
What I want to say about all of these in general, looking across these experiences, they are three or so cases:
You can't tell just because they tell you how vital KM is tha they really believe or don't. You should pay attention to what they really focus on. We're a young profession not yet recognised as distinct. There's something about our work that is cross-cutting and doesn't fit a matrix or hierarchy very well. If you can't get a reporting line that really will champion KM you at least need one that will value you for something and let you get on with the rest. Mostly, I find as KM lead I have more contacts with more people at various levels and am more involved with the actual craft and knowledge of how the work is done than how it is controlled - whereas the latter is much more the focus of many execs who have forgotten or never knew how the actual work of the company is actually done by its people. As others have said, CKO didn't really catch on in terms of a main board or operating board top head. |
|
|
|
Patrick Lambe
This is really good stuff Robert, and accords with my observations as a consultant working with different functional groups trying to get KM off the ground. To that I would add:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Organisation Development tends to “get" KM at the strategic level, and if they commit can generally be trusted to carry it through - IF they can maintain senior support. You say HR “nowadays” is split between talent and process. That’s been the case for as long as I remember, although HR (like IM, librarianship, KM) has agonised as a profession for the past several decades about the need to transition from being an administrative function to a strategic function. And yet the process still rules, anything that breaks, threatens, opens up to scrutiny, or lies outside the process will not usually get energy and is often actively (or passively) resisted. I’ve seen KM being launched out of Strategic Planning, but when SP is a distinct office or function that is not really using participatory approaches to strategy, then it can produce the KM strategy and roadmap but often cannot get the wheels turning in implementation. P
Patrick Lambe
Partner Straits Knowledge phone: +65 98528511 web: www.straitsknowledge.com resources: www.greenchameleon.com knowledge mapping: www.aithinsoftware.com 
|
|
|
|
Another thread with lots of comments that are really hitting home... In my experience, when it comes to the reporting line for KM, two things seems to matter most. As others have alluded to, a key one is being with a leader/leaders who are able
and willing to provide the type of guidance and help to develop the relationships that are necessary to grow the function in a way that is right for the overall organization. But another I don't hear discussed as much is being positioned in an area that is
central to the purpose of the organization. While I totally get the idea that KM can technically be housed anywhere, if the ultimate goal is deep integration (at least for enterprise type KM roles), it seems like the function has best chance of being successful
if you can get it embedded into or directly above an where many (if not all) of the organization's most central knowledge sharing systems and processes really come together - providing the strongest possible view of 'the factory floor,' so to speak. In my
organization (a large national foundation), after initiating development of the function in when I was in our Communications dept., about a year ago that line of thinking drove me to recommend lining KM up with Grants Management - and folks supported it. So
far, the move is feeling really promising... but I also realize it's still pretty early. I guess time will tell!
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Patrick Lambe via groups.io <plambe@...>
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2022 6:03:35 AM To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> Subject: Re: [SIKM] KM Reporting Structure - Typical or Best Practice #governance This is really good stuff Robert, and accords with my observations as a consultant working with different functional groups trying to get KM off the ground. To that I would add:
Organisation Development tends to “get" KM at the strategic level, and if they commit can generally be trusted to carry it through - IF they can maintain senior support.
You say HR “nowadays” is split between talent and process. That’s been the case for as long as I remember, although HR (like IM, librarianship, KM) has agonised as a profession for the past several decades about the need to transition from being
an administrative function to a strategic function. And yet the process still rules, anything that breaks, threatens, opens up to scrutiny, or lies outside the process will not usually get energy and is often actively (or passively) resisted.
I’ve seen KM being launched out of Strategic Planning, but when SP is a distinct office or function that is not really using participatory approaches to strategy, then it can produce the KM strategy and roadmap but often cannot get the wheels
turning in implementation.
P
Patrick
Lambe
Partner Straits Knowledge phone: +65 98528511 web: www.straitsknowledge.com resources: www.greenchameleon.com knowledge mapping: www.aithinsoftware.com 
|
|
|
|
Guillermo A. Galdamez
This topic always generates a lot of great discussions! Thank you all for sharing. From Stan's LinkedIn thread, I wanted to pull in the following comment by Simon Burton: We've looked at this in our KM roundtables and the conclusion was that there is no one size fits all to reporting line. It has to fit the priorities and context of the organisation but also be in a position to influence change. I agree with what he says. This is a question without a single "right" answer. I think that you need to have a lot of pragmatism and business savvy to find what works best for your organization. Business savvy because you need to understand what your organization values and prioritizes, be able to find people to aid/champion your initiatives, and how to position KM in a way that helps the organization achieve its goals. I also bring up pragmatism because it may not always be feasible to place it where you want it to be (To Patrick's point, it may not always be positioned to influence decisions at a strategic level). As a shameless plug, I also want to share an article by my boss, where she shares some of the experiences that we have had with a few of our clients: Where Should KM Leadership and Governance Belong in an Organization? Thanks for the conversations everybody!
|
|
|
