Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #state-of-KM #research #certification
|
Andrew Trickett
Hi Omid be happy to help out. I’m not available this week but will be free to chat from next Tuesday. As an Aston alumni 👩🎓 always pleased to be able to give something back.
|
|
|
|
Patrick Lambe
Hi Omid
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Good to see that this important project is progressing. I have forwarded your message to colleagues who are working in KM roles in Singapore and Malaysia. All the best Patrick
Patrick Lambe
Partner Straits Knowledge phone: +65 98528511 web: www.straitsknowledge.com resources: www.greenchameleon.com knowledge mapping: www.aithinsoftware.com 
|
|
|
|
Hi
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I am interested in. Regards Mohammad On Tuesday, September 14, 2021, Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote: Dear community members, -- Mohammad Hassanzadeh (PhD) Associate Professor and Head, Deptartment of Knowledge and Information Science Management and Economics Faculty, Tarbiat Modares University Tehran, Iran TeleFax: +98-21-82883678 |
|
|
|
Omid, for reasons I can't fathom your old post appeared at the top to me as if it were the most recent! Anyway, given it's a few months old do you have any findings to share?
Your questions do interest me. It's surprising to me to see just how many people there are on LinkedIn, for example, with some kind of KM job title. But what they're all doing fall into some different clusters - and some rather different clusters to those we maybe originally envisaged. Many are involved with digital content, intranets and IT; some are on helpdesks or are community moderators; and just a few are involved in the change from an industrial to a knowledge-based paradigm. But I can see the relationship between them. Equally, their future paths may be different. For a large number it's still going to be about information and probably AI-based automation. What's less clear I think is how widespread and strong is the appetite for the cultural change-related side of KM. It's curious that the pandemic has done more to smash industrial era concepts like the workplace than any amount of KM had up to then. We still have a major difficulty with the diffusion of innovation and technology (and science) transfer from the labs and researchers into applied fields: the best new knowledge is slow to get adopted and many organisations are still run in a rather notional way without reference to science or the best know-how. Recent reports suggest that most organisations are still grappling with the same issues that they were 25-30 years ago wrt KM and my experience supports that observation. Maybe it's just too short a time to have expected more. Certainly we have a bigger KM industry than I expected, but it's a bit different to what I expected. |
|
|
|
Dear all,
Together with my colleagues, we have been conducting research on the state of Knowledge Management and we have talked with many KM experts in the field over the last couple of years. Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. We would like to hear from more people in this forum. Would you agree with that statement? Many thanks for your replies in advance, Omid Omidvar |
|
|
|
Hamish Tacey
Yes, you caught us, KM is all just a fad, unfashionable, and no longer relevant! Alas, no one needs knowledge anymore :( On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 22:02, Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote: Dear all, |
|
|
|
Nick Milton
Hi Omid.
I would be very interested to know what metrics have you been using to determine the state of KM? Especially if you are trying to get a view across all geographies and industry sectors?
Personally I have found objective metrics hard to find, and many to be misleading. For example, the “google trends” graphs people often use to support the “KM is dead” hypothesis are misleading, as these only show the decrease in searches that use the KM term, and have to be normalised for the increase in searches overall (see http://www.nickmilton.com/2018/03/what-google-trends-really-tells-us.html). Similarly the growth in the numbers of people on LinkedIn with “Knowledge” in their job title has to be seen against the growth of linked-in itself.
My personal anecdotal evidence is that KM consulting hit a huge downturn during Covid from which it is only now recovering, but that KM within organisations may well have gained in status in response to remote working (see http://www.nickmilton.com/2021/05/how-covid-has-affected-km-in.html )
My other evidence is survey data, and in the past 3 surveys in 2014, 2017 and 2020, answered by (in total) over 1000 people working in KM worldwide, the majority (about 70%) responded that the importance of KM was increasing, a substantial minority said it is neither decreasing nor increasing, and a small minority said the importance is decreasing. http://www.nickmilton.com/2020/04/first-preliminary-results-from-knoco.html
Again, this is a survey of opinion rather than fact.
So any suggestions for objective data would be welcomed!
Nick Milton
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Omid Omidvar
Sent: 28 November 2022 19:02 To: main@SIKM.groups.io Subject: [SIKM] State of the art, Knowledge management #maturity #state-of-KM
Dear all, |
|
|
|
Dave Snowden
And I will repeat my earlier statement that voluntary surveys of people working in KM have little or no validity and are probably dangerous even as rough indicators The applies to the ‘State of Agile’ survey and many others
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Prof Dave Snowden Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 ProPlease excuse predictive text errors and typos On 29 Nov 2022, at 11:21, Nick Milton <nick.milton@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 02:02 PM, Omid Omidvar wrote:
Some experts have told us that KM is out of fashion. Would you agree with that statement?I would not agree. The following statistics suggest that there is still much interest in the field:
|
|
|
|
Alexandre Zivkovic
Dears,
Does such experts already contribute to any of the KM activities in their companies ?
KM is not an art or a religion or a job. It is “simply” evidence. The more you share, the more you will be beneficial (quality, efficiency, productivity).
It would be interested to understand why they say that. They have may be created the KM 2.0 world (to be invented).
Alexandre Zivkovic
De :
main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> de la part de Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> Dear all, |
|
|
|
Patrick Lambe
Omid
Perhaps you can clarify what you (or your sources) mean by “out of fashion” - because our responses seem to be confusing it with prevalence. My own take is that KM no longer has the “fashionable” glamour that it had in the heady late nineties, early two-noughts, but that it is endemic - and growing - simply because the underlying issues and opportunities facing organisations around knowledge and information use are chronically present and are a permanent function of trying to operate effectively at speed and scale in a constantly changing environment. That it is no longer “fashionable” in the way perhaps that accounting, or information management, are "not fashionable” (apologies to accountants and information managers) has an upside and a downside. The upside is that there are fewer incentives for sharks and shysters to get in the way of good work. The downside is that it can be hard to get visibility and understanding from leadership. But I am not sure if that was the sense you (or your sources) intended. P
Patrick Lambe
Partner Straits Knowledge phone: +65 98528511 web: www.straitsknowledge.com resources: www.greenchameleon.com knowledge mapping: www.aithinsoftware.com 
|
|
|
|
Tim Powell
Dear Omid,
TLDR: Yes, KM is “out of fashion” – but that per se may not be a bad thing. +++ When I created my company in 1996, it was partly on the strength of a then-recent report by The Conference Board to the effect that some large number (I believe it was 27%) of large companies “now” had a Chief Knowledge Officer. This seemed like a perfect audience for my own experience and interests, and a perfect launchpad for my work. What I experienced was that, in both the recessions of 2000 and of 2008, KM took a sharp turn downward. I’ve written about that in my new book and here: https://timwoodpowell.com/what-ever-happened-to-knowledge-management/
Activities that are “fashionable,” fizzy, and fun tend to not survive circle-the-wagons existential events, such as global economic recessions (as is currently being forecast for 2023). KM has had its own ups and downs – and I believe is still in the process of defining itself as an essential, sustainable enterprise activity. Recession or not, it’s always constructive to actively think about KM’s relevance and value proposition, and how these could be improved.
I hope this helps you. I’m sure I speak for many of us in saying that we’ll be interested to see what your research reveals!
tp
TIM WOOD POWELL | President, The Knowledge Agency® | Author, The Value of Knowledge | New York City, USA | TEL +1.212.243.1200 | SITE KnowledgeAgency.com | BLOG TimWoodPowell.com |
From:
<main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...>
Dear all, |
|
|
|
Hi Omid,
At J&J, I spoke about the value of KM as a solution to the challenges we face in today's world :
As of August 2022, we had a Knowledge Network accessed by over 20,000 Supply Chain colleagues annually and growing. However, even with this value statement and usage numbers, we were recently eliminated with thousands of other colleagues in a massive restructuring. My argument was that KM was going to be needed more than ever in the new organization, but the bottom line always wins. I would propose that if the word on the street is that KM is "outdated" it may be 1) the emergence of digital capabilities like AI and ML have many people asking why we need a KM group if machines can do the work? (we know the answer to that) or 2) does Knowledge Management need an updated moniker to reflect the dynamic nature of what we do? Management doesn't seem to do it justice. First time post here - hope you find it valuable. Best Regards, Linda Lavelle Formerly - Johnson & Johnson Future - Knowledge Dynamics consulting |
|
|
|
Alexandre Zivkovic
Hi,
The points here below are really of primarily importance to expect success in the new organization work (post COVID).
But luckily, the KM standard ISO 30401 is ready for this. The (§4) requests that :
The organization shall :
4.3 The organization shall : @ determine the range and applicability of the knowledge management system to establish its scope. @ within this scope, and with respect to the organizational purpose, the organization shall identify, evaluate and prioritize the knowledge domains (see the existing list) which have the greatest value to the organization and its interested parties, and to which the knowledge management system should be applied.
The principle of the KM are clear. After that, the Top Management needs to identify the correct target for the company and see how to embed KM within the heart of the company.
But before thinking to be ISO 30401, KM must become a culture !!!
KR
De :
main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> de la part de Linda Lavelle <Lindalavelle28@...> Hi Omid,
|
|
|
|
Dear Omid, To me, "Knowledge Management" is out of fashion for people who believe in magic. When enterprise social networking platforms appeared around 2005, the "old" concept of "Knowledge Management" was temporarily replaced with a new one, dubbed "Enterprise 2.0". When you look at sales presentations made at that time, collaboration platforms were presented as the ultimate solution to knowledge management, and some ill-informed managers actually believed it. Today, the same happens with "Artificial Intelligence", also considered by some as the ultimate solution to knowledge management. It is sad, because knowledge management is a serious discipline that cannot be addressed by technology alone. Beware the bandits who pretend that knowledge management can be automated. On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 8:02 PM Omid Omidvar <omidvaro@...> wrote: Dear all, |
|
|
|
Hi Omid,
Here's my response: As long as people are interacting, reflecting, discussing, and working together, new Knowledge will be generated (constructivist epistemology). Knowledge has to be captured, organized, formalized and re-used until it evolves into a new form of knowledge - commonly known as knowledge management. The KM discipline is like a fluid that takes the shape of its recipient, is conditioned by its context, and is profiled by its application. Knowledge management (KM) serves the purpose for which it's designed.
At 3R Knowledge consulting, we design knowledge management for organizational excellence. We emphasize that KM behaviors are integrated and embedded within the different organizational aspects. 3R Knowledge management methodology addresses 6 organizational areas: Organizational Agility, Organizational Learning, Organizational Performance, Organizational Intangible Assets, Organizational Change, and Organizational Behaviors. For more info, you may check <https://www.3rconsulting.org/our-capabilities>
If out of fashion means that KM is no longer a marketing buzzword, that's fine. KM will continue to exist as people continue to constitute organizations. Organizations express their pain and needs in different ways however they are inherently referring to one shape and form of Knowledge management. Our role as KM leaders is to articulate the organizational needs using their vocabularies.
I'll be glad to continue the conversation in a call.
Thank you Rachad |
|
|
|
Douglas Weidner
Martin, Well stated, including most all the necessary and sufficient points that should be made and which do prove your point. I would just like to clarify and/or enrich the implied 'People, Process and Technology concept, especially for those who might still think that KM is just or mostly about technology. Regarding People, traditional KM, especially as espoused in the early days by HR vs IT, was most often about training. The resultant emphasis was focused on skills and competencies, which is about Aptitudes. However, there is another side to People - Attitudes (Mindsets, motivations, passion, aka engagement). In the much researched opinion of the KM Institute (KMI), the Knowledge Age is mostly about people's attitudes, to wit: highly engaged people will win every time, regardless of the latest, trending tool. So, if KM is just about tools, whether AI or Social networking, et al, KM might wane. But if focusing attention toward human knowledge and measurably increased organizational performance, which should be the very heart of KM, Knowledge Management is alive and well, regardless what it might be called. There is enough proof (case studies) that KM has been a success, that KMI has introduced the Master Certified Knowledge Manager (MCKM) to focus on learning from each other by writing, peer-reviewing, and publishing (KMI Press) the cases developed by past CKMers in their KM roles or KM team leadership positions. Then, proven mastery of what it takes to be successful at KM will provide the next, more executive KM level, which we have dubbed the Certified Knowledge Officer (CKO)™.for obvious reasons. KM is far from dead! In fact, it is expanding rapidly, especially in diverse international regions where we will be providing CKM instruction in the dominant regional languages. AnySIKM members who are fluent in their own regional language, as well as English, may want to contact me. Cheers, Douglas Weidner Chief CKM Instructor Vice Chairman, KM Institute On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dave Snowden
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Prof Dave Snowden Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 ProPlease excuse predictive text errors and typos On 29 Nov 2022, at 18:49, Douglas Weidner <douglas.weidner@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Patrick Lambe
Hi Dave
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Like you, I have written a few pieces on KM certification. The great Stan Garfield has put together what I think is a well rounded list on this topic, including a couple of my posts on why I think most forms are, at best, of limited value for the money, and at worst, in their time have actively damaged the community. If I had to summarise my current views, I would say that most commercial certifications I have looked at tend to be more decorative than substantive. That’s not to say they completely lack value - but just not as “certifications”. Some people I’ve spoken to who have taken these programs have valued the orientation to KM that the training has given them and/or the credentials that give them recognition in the job marketplace. That’s fine, as far as it goes. My issue is that use of the term “certification” is misleading when all we have done is taken a training course because the term implies a professional competency, and neither the appearance of a credential nor an introductory overview to a field in short course will of themselves demonstrate a professional competency to objective and independently verifiable standards. The CILIP KM Chartership programme is the only one I’m aware of that involves independent professional peer review of a practice portfolio, independent of the purchase of any training products. P
Patrick Lambe
Partner Straits Knowledge phone: +65 98528511 web: www.straitsknowledge.com resources: www.greenchameleon.com knowledge mapping: www.aithinsoftware.com 
|
|
|
|
Kent Greenes
I haven’t contributed to this community in many years, so my 2 cents on the topic of certification may not have much impact. But this is one perspective that has changed dramatically for me over the years, and I feel compelled to share my thoughts.
Those that know me may recall how strongly and loudly I spoke against certification back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s. In my mind, I could not grasp how someone could be good at KM without a lot of real-world practice, mainly due to the complexity of the human aspects of our discipline. This, coupled with my belief that the game-changing promise of KM could only be enabled through the sharing and transfer of tacit knowledge, aligned so well with my observations on the limits of training and knowledge in the form of content that I couldn’t see how someone could attend a certification course and “get KM good enough to make a difference.” Of course, I missed the reality that people could be practicing and certifying in parallel or in addition ☹.
And lest we forget how many of us early pioneers and leaders in KM felt “our” approach to KM was the only way … my own insecurity based on my need to be “the one” and concern about competition got in the way of so much progress!
But to my surprise, as the years rolled by and I engaged with many organizations who had KM resources that got their basics from KM certification (especially those overseas), I observed firsthand how it really helped people accelerate up the learning curve. How great is that! In fact, I often found in those engagements I was able to concentrate on co-delivering KM and accelerating the intended outcomes.
Bottom line is I’ve learned whatever helps is good, and KM certification falls into this category. I’m still learning to get out of my own way, but I think that will remain a work in progress!
Best wishes for all for a healthy and happy holiday season, Kent
Kent Greenes Mobile: 760-450-6355
Senior Fellow Human Capital & Program Director: TCB Knowledge & Collaboration Council TCB Change & Transformation Council
Note: My working day may not be your working day. Please do not feel obliged to reply to this email outside of your normal working hours.
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Patrick Lambe
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 1:55 PM To: main@SIKM.groups.io Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
Hi Dave
Like you, I have written a few pieces on KM certification. The great Stan Garfield has put together what I think is a well rounded list on this topic, including a couple of my posts on why I think most forms are, at best, of limited value for the money, and at worst, in their time have actively damaged the community.
If I had to summarise my current views, I would say that most commercial certifications I have looked at tend to be more decorative than substantive. That’s not to say they completely lack value - but just not as “certifications”.
Some people I’ve spoken to who have taken these programs have valued the orientation to KM that the training has given them and/or the credentials that give them recognition in the job marketplace. That’s fine, as far as it goes.
My issue is that use of the term “certification” is misleading when all we have done is taken a training course because the term implies a professional competency, and neither the appearance of a credential nor an introductory overview to a field in short course will of themselves demonstrate a professional competency to objective and independently verifiable standards.
The CILIP KM Chartership programme is the only one I’m aware of that involves independent professional peer review of a practice portfolio, independent of the purchase of any training products.
P
Patrick Lambe
|
|
|
