|
Edwin K. Morris
I like the sentiment Kent and loudly say here here!
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Kent Greenes via groups.io <Kent@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 4:59:42 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
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
www.greenesconsulting.com
Senior Fellow Human Capital & Program Director:
TCB Knowledge & Collaboration Council
TCB Change & Transformation Council
Kent.greenes@...
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
Edwin K. Morris
Correction.
Hear, hear.
That is all.
😎
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Edwin K. Morrris via groups.io <President@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 5:09:19 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
I like the sentiment Kent and loudly say here here!
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Kent Greenes via groups.io <Kent@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 4:59:42 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
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
www.greenesconsulting.com
Senior Fellow Human Capital & Program Director:
TCB Knowledge & Collaboration Council
TCB Change & Transformation Council
Kent.greenes@...
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
I’d agree on the various university based approaches to KM as at least there is proper validation. But not the commercial operations … Prof Dave Snowden Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 Pro Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
On 29 Nov 2022, at 21:59, Kent Greenes <Kent@...> wrote:
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 www.greenesconsulting.com Senior Fellow Human Capital & Program Director: TCB Knowledge & Collaboration Council TCB Change & Transformation Council Kent.greenes@... 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. Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea? Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 Pro Please excuse predictive text errors and typos 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. 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. Vice Chairman, KM Institute On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote: 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,
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
|
|
|
What great conversations have come out of this wonderful thread. It has really stimulated my thinking about KMWorld 2023 next year in DC, following a great 2022 event earlier this month where so many KMers could reconnect in person. Lots of pics & comments at #KMWorld Rachad, I too believe KM is all about ppl, as you say 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 And, I like to use KM to mean knowledge sharing as that is the key I believe for the areas you mention, learning, performance, change, behaviours, etc Hopefully this discussion will spark lots of ideas for speaking at next year’s KMWorld event – always need the tools, tech & processes to support KM, but it’s the ppl that are the most important asset of any organization! Watch for our call for speakers in January & if you have ideas of themes for our event next year, please drop me a line. Thanks so much & happy holidays Jane Jane Dysart Program Director, KMWorld https://www.kmworld.com/Conference/2022 Curator of Curiosity & Partner Dysart & Jones Associates www.dysartjones.com jane@... skype & twitter jdysart
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rachad Najjar
Sent: November 29, 2022 1:44 PM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #state-of-KM #research Hi Omid,
This is a legitimate inquiry statement to requestion the known and discover the unknown provided that there's a rigorous scientific methodology to verify and validate the findings. 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
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Patrick Lambe via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 12:55
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
Hi Jane,
Thank you for the note and much appreciated your insight.
I do concur that sharing is key in any knowledge activity. it's an organizational core behavior.
I have in mind a theme for KMWorld 2023, I'll drop you a note.
Thank you
Rachad
|
|
|
I agree Dave but then this doesn’t seem to stop the thirst for creating them!, I find it cheers the managers up to have some data to look at. I no longer admit to working in KM (well not in public anyway) as its largely lost its brand value in my place of work. The substantive issues (save a lack of willingness to fund effective IM systems) rather like innovation or Futures (my new area of enquiry) are a sub optimal organisation brought about by a lack of leadership / personal responsibility . Still I heard VCDS (MoD) mention complexity yesterday- you’d be proud of him and indeed your legacy!
On 29 Nov 2022, at 11:24, Dave Snowden via groups.io <snowded@...> wrote:
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
Prof Dave Snowden Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 Pro Please excuse predictive text errors and typos On 29 Nov 2022, at 11:21, Nick Milton <nick.milton@...> wrote:
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.
<image001.png> So any suggestions for objective data would be welcomed! Nick Milton
Knoco Ltd
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,
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
|
|
|
Arthur Shelley
Jane, Yes I think KM may be perceived as being “out of fashion” by many. However, it remains highly relevant for those who truly understand it. I propose the question: How do you ever make a decision without knowledge? (badly is the short answer, but it is more complex than that). Fashion is fickle – however, sustained success is, like (good) KM, based on principles-based practices that have not changed dramatically over time. Yes of course, actions, processes and tools are evolving all the time and this greatly accelerates the way that we can apply existing knowledge and cocreate new knowledge (and yet the foundational principles and reasons why we do this remain largely the same). People, relationships and trust are at the heart of any great knowledge initiative. Facilitate the behaviours and conversations right, and collaboration will happen to cocreate new knowledge and improve performance. Ultimately, we “do KM” to make a positive difference in whatever endeavour we are undertaking. So, a focus on the people aspects of KM would be a very productive theme to explore at KM World (and in conversations leading up to that). A conversation starter for this is my article on “Reverse Bloom Learning Framework” here free (open source): https://coming.gr/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2_December2020_JEICOM_FINAL_Arthur-W-Shelley.pdf It discusses how we can facilitate the cocreation of new knowledge in context to develop novel solutions for complex challenges. It uses real projects contexts to develop participants’ capabilities across all three learning domains (“Knowing, Doing and Being”). When we treat knowledge initiatives as learning opportunities, we generate new knowledge and immediately apply this to a real context. The foundations for this are socialising possibilities from a diversity of sources to generate hybridised options. People are the heart of this, and critical to its success. I expanded a little on this in Becoming Adaptable, also introducing the concept of “MindFLEX” - the ability to hold seemingly opposites in mind, in parallel when exploring options generation through collaborative projects. Plenty to discuss (and hopefully apply to create value).
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jane Dysart
Sent: Wednesday, 30 November 2022 11:12 AM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #state-of-KM #research What great conversations have come out of this wonderful thread. It has really stimulated my thinking about KMWorld 2023 next year in DC, following a great 2022 event earlier this month where so many KMers could reconnect in person. Lots of pics & comments at #KMWorld Rachad, I too believe KM is all about ppl, as you say 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 And, I like to use KM to mean knowledge sharing as that is the key I believe for the areas you mention, learning, performance, change, behaviours, etc Hopefully this discussion will spark lots of ideas for speaking at next year’s KMWorld event – always need the tools, tech & processes to support KM, but it’s the ppl that are the most important asset of any organization! Watch for our call for speakers in January & if you have ideas of themes for our event next year, please drop me a line. Thanks so much & happy holidays Jane Jane Dysart Program Director, KMWorld https://www.kmworld.com/Conference/2022 Curator of Curiosity & Partner Dysart & Jones Associates www.dysartjones.com jane@... skype & twitter jdysart Hi Omid,
This is a legitimate inquiry statement to requestion the known and discover the unknown provided that there's a rigorous scientific methodology to verify and validate the findings. 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
|
|
|
Andy Farnsworth
"People, relationships and trust are at the heart of any great knowledge initiative. Facilitate the behaviours and conversations right, and collaboration will happen to cocreate new knowledge and improve performance." I've been watching this develop in real time as I test a hybrid org operating / knowledge synthesis system with two organizations. When people start seeing the human connections within the knowledge - links to people on a team, following the same tags, collaborating on a report - they make efforts to cultivate the knowledge of the group. I'm seeing them share more of their knowledge in more useful contexts, offer perspectives and support to colleagues, and ask more questions of others. Bringing the emotional/intuitive aspects of experience into work is also making the system a playground of knowledge. People are making time to explore fragments of knowledge across the system, in part because the deep connections to the people behind the knowledge make for a richer organizational ecosystem, one that can be sensed and felt instead of just "comprehended". Couple videos/GIFs of this in action on my LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ehfarnsy_work-app-empathy-activity-6996442041119363072-e5Yt?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ehfarnsy_remotework-futureofwork-funtools-activity-7000489025983721472-xo5x?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android --- Andy Farnsworth Morning Strategy
|
|
|
Jason Haugh
Hi everyone.
I'm new to the group, so thanks for understanding if these points have been made. Two things I think of with this:
1. Knowledge management has been around since humans started communicating. The traditions, trades, and skills handed down from one generation to the next have demanded some kind of method for maintaining the knowledge gained, improving upon it, and ensuring it was transferred. Technology has only helped enable that (everything from stone tablets to computer tablets). KM is as relevant today as it was way back then and will continue to be so well into the future.
2. Our challenge, as knowledge professionals, is to help create a knowledge architecture within an organization or company, that maps to the enterprise architecture, and enables effective knowledge processes to create better decision making and foster conditions for innovation. Aren't all business processes dependent on imbedded knowledge? We must help organization leadership recognize this and then be able to derive value from it that supports the enterprise. In my experience, organizations that have failed, failed first in creating an architecture that fostered knowledge activities, and then failed in linking them into the enterprise goals.
Jason Haugh
Knowledge Architect and Digital Habitat Developer
OhioHealth
|
|
|
I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment).
My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to
pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarily worthless – if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity).
But if it truly
costs you, then it is far more likely to have value.
This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word
submission. That’s costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me.
- Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
- Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
- Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker
equivalent of certification. Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually more
lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice.
Cheers,
Chris
From:
main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of bill@... <bill@...>
Date: Wednesday, 30 November 2022 at 01:50
To: 'main@SIKM.groups.io' <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the
“training” that accompanies it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an
accredited and accepted body of knowledge.
Here are the links:
(7)
Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...Yet? | LinkedIn
(7)
(Part II) Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...How Will You Know It's Real?? | LinkedIn
Best
Bill
Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at
www.workingknowledge-csp.com
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Patrick Lambe via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 12:55
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
Sorry friends, this isn’t going to be short… Full disclosure, I’ve got a course at KM Institute, I’ve built courses for Microsoft, LinkedIn Learning, etc. I’m also teaching for PMI next year on Change Management.
First, let me take the title – is KM out of fashion. Maybe. Some indicators point to yes but mostly they point to the idea that KM is being absorbed into other disciplines – or it’s being seen as a core requirement that just “magically”
happens. I can say that my experience has been that a decade ago KM seemed like it was dying (beyond falling out of fashion), however, in today’s world, I see it as regaining a degree of interest and relevancy. Is a CEO going to point on the desk and tell
his direct reports and his board that he must have it above everything else? That’s very unlikely. However, are we all aware of the challenges of an aging, increasingly mobile, gig economy, etc., workforce? Yes.
More importantly, let me talk about certifications – or rather let me talk about profession building because I’ve seen a few that have worked and a few that haven’t and what is most important isn’t what anyone wants to hear.
Professions are built based on employers hiring. That’s it. Period. End of story.
Certifications are shortcuts for employers to know that the person they’re hiring can do the job (with a reasonable degree of accuracy.) Certifications are valuable if – and only if – they help employers make employment decisions. Full
stop.
So, what does that mean for a profession? Well, it means that there needs to be a set of core skills that every practitioner can do passably well such that employers want to buy it. There’s got to be a strong, urgent RoI and it can’t
be so soft they don’t understand it. It also has a story because as much as we hate to admit it, we’re emotional creatures and it’s the story that sells us – we rationalize afterwards.
Here’s the rub – we’ve not sold the story. PMI sold the idea that for a project to be successful you need a PMP. They sold the story that there’s a body of knowledge that project managers agree to and know that lead to success. It’s
all hogwash. Projects run by PMP certified project managers still fail at roughly a 70% rate. I’ve never met any PM who knows 70% of what’s in the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBoK). The truth is that if you did everything that’s a “best practice” in the PMBoK
your project is practically guaranteed to fail because it’s way to heavy for most projects. Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices group inside their development division’s slogan was “Proven Practices, Predictable Results.” “Best practice” is the one that fits
the circumstances. Body of Knowledge is the enumeration of the known proven practices – often without a sense for when they should be reused. We need predictability and all of us will cringe to admit that even in our chosen subspecialities the failure rates
are crushing.
If my opinion, if we want to make KM a true profession, we’ve got to get to the core skills that lead to predictable results – or convince the world we’ve got them. The problem with this process – as I’ve seen when building certification
exams is that everyone wants to believe that their unique skill is the unique skill upon which the entire profession is based. Stan Garfield is great at community building, Dave Snowden at decision making and complexity management, Patrick Lambe at taxonomy,
etc. In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix. (These are examples only -- all of them are personally generous people who would be less likely to exhibit this, they’re just examples that I expect everyone will know and
who know me well enough to not take offense at me using them as examples.) The problem is – like most things KM – it’s not that you can remove any one aspect. Make bread and people will tell you flour is the most important – until they leave out yeast or
salt. It doesn’t take much but it’s required.
If we’re going to have a role for KM, we need to decide what skills are necessary – and at what level. We had a problem with expert exams for Microsoft SharePoint. The coverage was too broad. No one knew every pillar – because in practice
no one knew all of them in detail. The passing score had to be really quite low on those exams. We didn’t take into account that awareness, familiarity, and determining applicability were more important than which bit to set. We needed to be more focused
on knowing when you need help – and that doesn’t work well in the context of a certification exam.
Do certificates of completion (note: I’m not calling them certifications) have value? Yes. It means you are likely to have basic awareness. It means that the employer is unlikely to be surprised by something because you’ve been exposed
to the major areas. Is it the same as a certification or as a profession? No, that being said I think the opportunity is ripe to define what the profession is and should be.
In all fairness, one of the other spaces I live and work in is change management. Every organization (including PMI ) thinks they can talk about change management. There are two different industry associations with different agendas.
They don’t truly have a body of knowledge and they have two different certifications that no one cares about. I have like
20 change models (or components) listed on my web site. A colleague mapped another 20 that I’ve not included. It’s too fragmented. The “standard” from one of the bodies is too much PM and
not enough people. They have the same problem in this space where the edges are amorphous, and the people have different perspectives on what is the most important.
Information Governance is a pipe dream that information managers and records managers have had for over a decade now. Though there’s better definition of what it is – in attempts to make everyone happy they’ve included everything except
the kitchen sink. And again … no one can be an expert in all of them. Almost no one is getting certified by either of the two bodies certifying for information governance. For that matter, almost no one is getting information management certifications –
and that’s been around a lot longer by a larger organization. I’ve communicated with them directly on several occasions their challenge is few people hire information manager roles. (Only super-large organizations and they’re <30% of the market in the US
based on statistical data.)
KM isn’t alone in this problem. It’s a persistent issue for people passionate about a topic – but unless and until we draw a connection – and urgent connection – to the bottom line, it’s not going to get addressed.
I was in a conversation with someone recently regarding suicide prevention programs for employers. They suggested that all employers should care about their employees and therefore do an anti-suicide training. I tried (rather unsuccessfully)
to explain that running an organization is about risk management. There’s never enough resources to do everything you want or to manage every risk. If it’s not important – and urgent – it’s not going to be addressed. KM for all of the greatness isn’t urgent
until someone turns in their notice – and that’s too late.
Rob
P.S. If you’re offended because I won’t call KM a profession – please start by defining what makes a profession.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Chris Collison via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 3:56 AM
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment).
My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to
pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarily worthless – if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity).
But if it truly costs you, then it is far more likely to have value.
This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word submission. That’s
costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me.
- Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
- Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
- Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker equivalent of certification.
Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually
more lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice.
Cheers,
Chris
I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the “training” that accompanies
it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an accredited and accepted body
of knowledge.
Here are the links:
(7)
Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...Yet? | LinkedIn
(7)
(Part II) Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...How Will You Know It's Real?? | LinkedIn
Best
Bill
Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at
www.workingknowledge-csp.com
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
Much or value in this post Robert, but that said you are pushing a calumny, but I’ll come back to that
- Knowledge management is clearly not a profession - there is even less consensus about what it is that within PMI and even they haven’t really made it - what is a BOK anyway? No agreement
- Its not that KM is coming back into fashion, its on its third or fourth resurrection and its repeating all the same mistakes
- The certification schemes by their nature dumbed down the field to what could be taught and certified. Lowest common denominator stuff
- There is a route for KM to become strategic again but it will have to do things differently and there is little sign of the
- Much that was progressive in KM is now in other fields or work and is unlikely to return - A lot of my material on tacit knowledge is now firmly in the strategy and OD spaces even though it also KM
- There are two or possible three fundamentally different philosophies around how to manage knowledge and the certification and other schemes remain information centric (ie one of the schools)
Then to the Calumny - I know that Stan is better at communities and Patrick has forgotten more about taxonomy than I knew in the first place. Both are needed as well as my work in decision making, complexity, tacit knowledge etc. All are needed and your statement that in "In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix” is just plain wrong
Prof Dave Snowden
Director & Founder - The Cynefin Centre CSO - The Cynefin Company Social Media: snowded
|
On 1 Dec 2022, at 13:50, Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:
Sorry friends, this isn’t going to be short… Full disclosure, I’ve got a course at KM Institute, I’ve built courses for Microsoft, LinkedIn Learning, etc. I’m also teaching for PMI next year on Change Management. First, let me take the title – is KM out of fashion. Maybe. Some indicators point to yes but mostly they point to the idea that KM is being absorbed into other disciplines – or it’s being seen as a core requirement that just “magically” happens. I can say that my experience has been that a decade ago KM seemed like it was dying (beyond falling out of fashion), however, in today’s world, I see it as regaining a degree of interest and relevancy. Is a CEO going to point on the desk and tell his direct reports and his board that he must have it above everything else? That’s very unlikely. However, are we all aware of the challenges of an aging, increasingly mobile, gig economy, etc., workforce? Yes. More importantly, let me talk about certifications – or rather let me talk about profession building because I’ve seen a few that have worked and a few that haven’t and what is most important isn’t what anyone wants to hear. Professions are built based on employers hiring. That’s it. Period. End of story. Certifications are shortcuts for employers to know that the person they’re hiring can do the job (with a reasonable degree of accuracy.) Certifications are valuable if – and only if – they help employers make employment decisions. Full stop. So, what does that mean for a profession? Well, it means that there needs to be a set of core skills that every practitioner can do passably well such that employers want to buy it. There’s got to be a strong, urgent RoI and it can’t be so soft they don’t understand it. It also has a story because as much as we hate to admit it, we’re emotional creatures and it’s the story that sells us – we rationalize afterwards. Here’s the rub – we’ve not sold the story. PMI sold the idea that for a project to be successful you need a PMP. They sold the story that there’s a body of knowledge that project managers agree to and know that lead to success. It’s all hogwash. Projects run by PMP certified project managers still fail at roughly a 70% rate. I’ve never met any PM who knows 70% of what’s in the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBoK). The truth is that if you did everything that’s a “best practice” in the PMBoK your project is practically guaranteed to fail because it’s way to heavy for most projects. Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices group inside their development division’s slogan was “Proven Practices, Predictable Results.” “Best practice” is the one that fits the circumstances. Body of Knowledge is the enumeration of the known proven practices – often without a sense for when they should be reused. We need predictability and all of us will cringe to admit that even in our chosen subspecialities the failure rates are crushing. If my opinion, if we want to make KM a true profession, we’ve got to get to the core skills that lead to predictable results – or convince the world we’ve got them. The problem with this process – as I’ve seen when building certification exams is that everyone wants to believe that their unique skill is the unique skill upon which the entire profession is based. Stan Garfield is great at community building, Dave Snowden at decision making and complexity management, Patrick Lambe at taxonomy, etc. In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix. (These are examples only -- all of them are personally generous people who would be less likely to exhibit this, they’re just examples that I expect everyone will know and who know me well enough to not take offense at me using them as examples.) The problem is – like most things KM – it’s not that you can remove any one aspect. Make bread and people will tell you flour is the most important – until they leave out yeast or salt. It doesn’t take much but it’s required. If we’re going to have a role for KM, we need to decide what skills are necessary – and at what level. We had a problem with expert exams for Microsoft SharePoint. The coverage was too broad. No one knew every pillar – because in practice no one knew all of them in detail. The passing score had to be really quite low on those exams. We didn’t take into account that awareness, familiarity, and determining applicability were more important than which bit to set. We needed to be more focused on knowing when you need help – and that doesn’t work well in the context of a certification exam. Do certificates of completion (note: I’m not calling them certifications) have value? Yes. It means you are likely to have basic awareness. It means that the employer is unlikely to be surprised by something because you’ve been exposed to the major areas. Is it the same as a certification or as a profession? No, that being said I think the opportunity is ripe to define what the profession is and should be. In all fairness, one of the other spaces I live and work in is change management. Every organization (including PMI ) thinks they can talk about change management. There are two different industry associations with different agendas. They don’t truly have a body of knowledge and they have two different certifications that no one cares about. I have like 20 change models (or components) listed on my web site. A colleague mapped another 20 that I’ve not included. It’s too fragmented. The “standard” from one of the bodies is too much PM and not enough people. They have the same problem in this space where the edges are amorphous, and the people have different perspectives on what is the most important. Information Governance is a pipe dream that information managers and records managers have had for over a decade now. Though there’s better definition of what it is – in attempts to make everyone happy they’ve included everything except the kitchen sink. And again … no one can be an expert in all of them. Almost no one is getting certified by either of the two bodies certifying for information governance. For that matter, almost no one is getting information management certifications – and that’s been around a lot longer by a larger organization. I’ve communicated with them directly on several occasions their challenge is few people hire information manager roles. (Only super-large organizations and they’re <30% of the market in the US based on statistical data.) KM isn’t alone in this problem. It’s a persistent issue for people passionate about a topic – but unless and until we draw a connection – and urgent connection – to the bottom line, it’s not going to get addressed. I was in a conversation with someone recently regarding suicide prevention programs for employers. They suggested that all employers should care about their employees and therefore do an anti-suicide training. I tried (rather unsuccessfully) to explain that running an organization is about risk management. There’s never enough resources to do everything you want or to manage every risk. If it’s not important – and urgent – it’s not going to be addressed. KM for all of the greatness isn’t urgent until someone turns in their notice – and that’s too late. Rob P.S. If you’re offended because I won’t call KM a profession – please start by defining what makes a profession. ------------------- Robert L. Bogue I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment). My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarilyworthless – if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity). But if it truly costs you, then it is far more likely to have value. This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word submission. That’s costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me. - Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
- Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
- Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker equivalent of certification. Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually more lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice. Cheers, Chris I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the “training” that accompanies it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an accredited and accepted body of knowledge. Here are the links: Best Bill <image002.png> 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. Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea? Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge 11 Pro Please excuse predictive text errors and typos 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 aboutAptitudes. 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. 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. Vice Chairman, KM Institute On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage < mrdugage@...> wrote: 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,
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
|
|
|
Terrifically useful thread here—both philosophical and practical.
@Dave, I am really interested in your point #4 below. Where’s the best summary of your thoughts on the path for KM to become strategic again (I’m sure you’ve articulated it many
times)?
I came to corporate knowledge management after a number of years in academic libraries (managing acquisitions and online resources), and while KM and academic librarianship differ
in some important ways, the struggles are overall quite similar. Appreciated your point, @Rob, about parallel struggles in the area of change management. It can feel like a Sisyphean task to articulate KM’s value and maintain its relevance. When considered
in that ruthlessly pragmatic way (answering the question, “How can KM drive business value?”), in that respect it is just the same as pretty much any other area of knowledge, field, profession, or even business organization. For my money, I find the work
APQC does to produce relevant thought leadership, continuing education, and resources the most valuable source of aid for KM practitioners.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Dave Snowden via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 9:43 AM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
Much or value in this post Robert, but that said you are pushing a calumny, but I’ll come back to that
-
Knowledge management is clearly not a profession - there is even less consensus about what it is that within PMI and even they haven’t really made it - what is a BOK anyway? No agreement
-
Its not that KM is coming back into fashion, its on its third or fourth resurrection and its repeating all the same mistakes
-
The certification schemes by their nature dumbed down the field to what could be taught and certified. Lowest common denominator stuff
-
There is a route for KM to become strategic again but it will have to do things differently and there is little sign of the
-
Much that was progressive in KM is now in other fields or work and is unlikely to return - A lot of my material on tacit knowledge is now firmly in the strategy and OD spaces even though it also KM
-
There are two or possible three fundamentally different philosophies around how to manage knowledge and the certification and other schemes remain information centric (ie one of the schools)
Then to the Calumny - I know that Stan is better at communities and Patrick has forgotten more about taxonomy than I knew in the first place. Both are needed as well as my work in decision making, complexity, tacit knowledge etc. All
are needed and your statement that in "In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix” is just plain wrong
Prof Dave Snowden
Director & Founder - The Cynefin Centre
CSO - The Cynefin Company
|
On 1 Dec 2022, at 13:50, Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:
Sorry friends, this isn’t going to be short… Full disclosure, I’ve got a course at KM Institute, I’ve built courses for Microsoft, LinkedIn Learning, etc. I’m also teaching for PMI next year on Change Management.
First, let me take the title – is KM out of fashion. Maybe. Some indicators point to yes but mostly they point to the idea that KM is being absorbed into other disciplines – or it’s being seen as a core requirement that just “magically”
happens. I can say that my experience has been that a decade ago KM seemed like it was dying (beyond falling out of fashion), however, in today’s world, I see it as regaining a degree of interest and relevancy. Is a CEO going to point on the desk and tell
his direct reports and his board that he must have it above everything else? That’s very unlikely. However, are we all aware of the challenges of an aging, increasingly mobile, gig economy, etc., workforce? Yes.
More importantly, let me talk about certifications – or rather let me talk about profession building because I’ve seen a few that have worked and a few that haven’t and what is most important isn’t what anyone wants to hear.
Professions are built based on employers hiring. That’s it. Period. End of story.
Certifications are shortcuts for employers to know that the person they’re hiring can do the job (with a reasonable degree of accuracy.) Certifications are valuable if – and only if – they help employers make employment decisions. Full
stop.
So, what does that mean for a profession? Well, it means that there needs to be a set of core skills that every practitioner can do passably well such that employers want to buy it. There’s got to be a strong, urgent RoI and it can’t
be so soft they don’t understand it. It also has a story because as much as we hate to admit it, we’re emotional creatures and it’s the story that sells us – we rationalize afterwards.
Here’s the rub – we’ve not sold the story. PMI sold the idea that for a project to be successful you need a PMP. They sold the story that there’s a body of knowledge that project managers agree to and know that lead to success. It’s
all hogwash. Projects run by PMP certified project managers still fail at roughly a 70% rate. I’ve never met any PM who knows 70% of what’s in the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBoK). The truth is that if you did everything that’s a “best practice” in the PMBoK
your project is practically guaranteed to fail because it’s way to heavy for most projects. Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices group inside their development division’s slogan was “Proven Practices, Predictable Results.” “Best practice” is the one that fits
the circumstances. Body of Knowledge is the enumeration of the known proven practices – often without a sense for when they should be reused. We need predictability and all of us will cringe to admit that even in our chosen subspecialities the failure rates
are crushing.
If my opinion, if we want to make KM a true profession, we’ve got to get to the core skills that lead to predictable results – or convince the world we’ve got them. The problem with this process – as I’ve seen when building certification
exams is that everyone wants to believe that their unique skill is the unique skill upon which the entire profession is based. Stan Garfield is great at community building, Dave Snowden at decision making and complexity management, Patrick Lambe at taxonomy,
etc. In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix. (These are examples only -- all of them are personally generous people who would be less likely to exhibit this, they’re just examples that I expect everyone will know and
who know me well enough to not take offense at me using them as examples.) The problem is – like most things KM – it’s not that you can remove any one aspect. Make bread and people will tell you flour is the most important – until they leave out yeast or
salt. It doesn’t take much but it’s required.
If we’re going to have a role for KM, we need to decide what skills are necessary – and at what level. We had a problem with expert exams for Microsoft SharePoint. The coverage was too broad. No one knew every pillar – because in practice
no one knew all of them in detail. The passing score had to be really quite low on those exams. We didn’t take into account that awareness, familiarity, and determining applicability were more important than which bit to set. We needed to be more focused
on knowing when you need help – and that doesn’t work well in the context of a certification exam.
Do certificates of completion (note: I’m not calling them certifications) have value? Yes. It means you are likely to have basic awareness. It means that the employer is unlikely to be surprised by something because you’ve been exposed
to the major areas. Is it the same as a certification or as a profession? No, that being said I think the opportunity is ripe to define what the profession is and should be.
In all fairness, one of the other spaces I live and work in is change management. Every organization (including PMI ) thinks they can talk about change management. There are two different industry associations with different agendas.
They don’t truly have a body of knowledge and they have two different certifications that no one cares about. I have like 20 change models (or
components) listed on my web site. A colleague mapped another 20 that I’ve not included. It’s too fragmented. The “standard” from one of the bodies is too much PM and not enough people. They have the same problem in this space where the edges are amorphous,
and the people have different perspectives on what is the most important.
Information Governance is a pipe dream that information managers and records managers have had for over a decade now. Though there’s better definition of what it is – in attempts to make everyone happy they’ve included everything except
the kitchen sink. And again … no one can be an expert in all of them. Almost no one is getting certified by either of the two bodies certifying for information governance. For that matter, almost no one is getting information management certifications –
and that’s been around a lot longer by a larger organization. I’ve communicated with them directly on several occasions their challenge is few people hire information manager roles. (Only super-large organizations and they’re <30% of the market in the US
based on statistical data.)
KM isn’t alone in this problem. It’s a persistent issue for people passionate about a topic – but unless and until we draw a connection – and urgent connection – to the bottom line, it’s not going to get addressed.
I was in a conversation with someone recently regarding suicide prevention programs for employers. They suggested that all employers should care about their employees and therefore do an anti-suicide training. I tried (rather unsuccessfully)
to explain that running an organization is about risk management. There’s never enough resources to do everything you want or to manage every risk. If it’s not important – and urgent – it’s not going to be addressed. KM for all of the greatness isn’t urgent
until someone turns in their notice – and that’s too late.
P.S. If you’re offended because I won’t call KM a profession – please start by defining what makes a profession.
I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment).
My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarilyworthless
– if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity).
But if it truly costs you, then it is far more likely to have value.
This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word submission. That’s
costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me.
-
Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
-
Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
-
Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker equivalent of certification. Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal
snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually
more lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice.
I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the “training” that accompanies
it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an accredited and accepted body
of knowledge.
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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 aboutAptitudes. 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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
Valdis Krebs
>> " People, relationships and trust are at the heart of any great knowledge initiative"
Our experience exactly, Andy! If you do not have the above in place all technology you try will fail.
Valdis
|
|
|
Dave,
My apologies if my parenthetical statement was unclear. I chose you, Stan, and Patrick as counterexamples. In general terms, people tend to advocate for their areas of expertise. It’s a tautology that they think it’s important to certification
because they think it’s important to career.
It takes wise people to fight against this bias and recognize other areas of a space that may be equally important. I consider you – and many others here – wise enough to overcome the biases that we all as humans face relative to the importance
of our own knowledge.
Rob
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Dave Snowden via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 9:43 AM
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
Much or value in this post Robert, but that said you are pushing a calumny, but I’ll come back to that
-
Knowledge management is clearly not a profession - there is even less consensus about what it is that within PMI and even they haven’t really made it - what is a BOK anyway? No agreement
-
Its not that KM is coming back into fashion, its on its third or fourth resurrection and its repeating all the same mistakes
-
The certification schemes by their nature dumbed down the field to what could be taught and certified. Lowest common denominator stuff
-
There is a route for KM to become strategic again but it will have to do things differently and there is little sign of the
-
Much that was progressive in KM is now in other fields or work and is unlikely to return - A lot of my material on tacit knowledge is now firmly in the strategy and OD spaces even though it also KM
-
There are two or possible three fundamentally different philosophies around how to manage knowledge and the certification and other schemes remain information centric (ie one of the schools)
Then to the Calumny - I know that Stan is better at communities and Patrick has forgotten more about taxonomy than I knew in the first place. Both are needed as well as my work in decision making, complexity, tacit knowledge etc. All
are needed and your statement that in "In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix” is just plain wrong
Prof Dave Snowden
Director & Founder - The Cynefin Centre
CSO - The Cynefin Company
|
On 1 Dec 2022, at 13:50, Robert L. Bogue <rbogue@...> wrote:
Sorry friends, this isn’t going to be short… Full disclosure, I’ve got a course at KM Institute, I’ve built courses for Microsoft, LinkedIn Learning, etc. I’m also teaching for PMI next year on Change Management.
First, let me take the title – is KM out of fashion. Maybe. Some indicators point to yes but mostly they point to the idea that KM is being absorbed into other disciplines – or it’s being seen as a core requirement that just “magically”
happens. I can say that my experience has been that a decade ago KM seemed like it was dying (beyond falling out of fashion), however, in today’s world, I see it as regaining a degree of interest and relevancy. Is a CEO going to point on the desk and tell
his direct reports and his board that he must have it above everything else? That’s very unlikely. However, are we all aware of the challenges of an aging, increasingly mobile, gig economy, etc., workforce? Yes.
More importantly, let me talk about certifications – or rather let me talk about profession building because I’ve seen a few that have worked and a few that haven’t and what is most important isn’t what anyone wants to hear.
Professions are built based on employers hiring. That’s it. Period. End of story.
Certifications are shortcuts for employers to know that the person they’re hiring can do the job (with a reasonable degree of accuracy.) Certifications are valuable if – and only if – they help employers make employment decisions. Full
stop.
So, what does that mean for a profession? Well, it means that there needs to be a set of core skills that every practitioner can do passably well such that employers want to buy it. There’s got to be a strong, urgent RoI and it can’t
be so soft they don’t understand it. It also has a story because as much as we hate to admit it, we’re emotional creatures and it’s the story that sells us – we rationalize afterwards.
Here’s the rub – we’ve not sold the story. PMI sold the idea that for a project to be successful you need a PMP. They sold the story that there’s a body of knowledge that project managers agree to and know that lead to success. It’s
all hogwash. Projects run by PMP certified project managers still fail at roughly a 70% rate. I’ve never met any PM who knows 70% of what’s in the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBoK). The truth is that if you did everything that’s a “best practice” in the PMBoK
your project is practically guaranteed to fail because it’s way to heavy for most projects. Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices group inside their development division’s slogan was “Proven Practices, Predictable Results.” “Best practice” is the one that fits
the circumstances. Body of Knowledge is the enumeration of the known proven practices – often without a sense for when they should be reused. We need predictability and all of us will cringe to admit that even in our chosen subspecialities the failure rates
are crushing.
If my opinion, if we want to make KM a true profession, we’ve got to get to the core skills that lead to predictable results – or convince the world we’ve got them. The problem with this process – as I’ve seen when building certification
exams is that everyone wants to believe that their unique skill is the unique skill upon which the entire profession is based. Stan Garfield is great at community building, Dave Snowden at decision making and complexity management, Patrick Lambe at taxonomy,
etc. In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix. (These are examples only -- all of them are personally generous people who would be less likely to exhibit this, they’re just examples that I expect everyone will know and
who know me well enough to not take offense at me using them as examples.) The problem is – like most things KM – it’s not that you can remove any one aspect. Make bread and people will tell you flour is the most important – until they leave out yeast or
salt. It doesn’t take much but it’s required.
If we’re going to have a role for KM, we need to decide what skills are necessary – and at what level. We had a problem with expert exams for Microsoft SharePoint. The coverage was too broad. No one knew every pillar – because in practice
no one knew all of them in detail. The passing score had to be really quite low on those exams. We didn’t take into account that awareness, familiarity, and determining applicability were more important than which bit to set. We needed to be more focused
on knowing when you need help – and that doesn’t work well in the context of a certification exam.
Do certificates of completion (note: I’m not calling them certifications) have value? Yes. It means you are likely to have basic awareness. It means that the employer is unlikely to be surprised by something because you’ve been exposed
to the major areas. Is it the same as a certification or as a profession? No, that being said I think the opportunity is ripe to define what the profession is and should be.
In all fairness, one of the other spaces I live and work in is change management. Every organization (including PMI ) thinks they can talk about change management. There are two different industry associations with different agendas.
They don’t truly have a body of knowledge and they have two different certifications that no one cares about. I have like 20 change models (or
components) listed on my web site. A colleague mapped another 20 that I’ve not included. It’s too fragmented. The “standard” from one of the bodies is too much PM and not enough people. They have the same problem in this space where the edges are amorphous,
and the people have different perspectives on what is the most important.
Information Governance is a pipe dream that information managers and records managers have had for over a decade now. Though there’s better definition of what it is – in attempts to make everyone happy they’ve included everything except
the kitchen sink. And again … no one can be an expert in all of them. Almost no one is getting certified by either of the two bodies certifying for information governance. For that matter, almost no one is getting information management certifications –
and that’s been around a lot longer by a larger organization. I’ve communicated with them directly on several occasions their challenge is few people hire information manager roles. (Only super-large organizations and they’re <30% of the market in the US
based on statistical data.)
KM isn’t alone in this problem. It’s a persistent issue for people passionate about a topic – but unless and until we draw a connection – and urgent connection – to the bottom line, it’s not going to get addressed.
I was in a conversation with someone recently regarding suicide prevention programs for employers. They suggested that all employers should care about their employees and therefore do an anti-suicide training. I tried (rather unsuccessfully)
to explain that running an organization is about risk management. There’s never enough resources to do everything you want or to manage every risk. If it’s not important – and urgent – it’s not going to be addressed. KM for all of the greatness isn’t urgent
until someone turns in their notice – and that’s too late.
P.S. If you’re offended because I won’t call KM a profession – please start by defining what makes a profession.
I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment).
My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarilyworthless
– if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity).
But if it truly costs you, then it is far more likely to have value.
This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word submission. That’s
costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me.
-
Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
-
Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
-
Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker equivalent of certification. Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal
snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually
more lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice.
I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the “training” that accompanies
it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an accredited and accepted body
of knowledge.
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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 aboutAptitudes. 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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
I would also suggest that “meeting people where they are, and not where you want them to be” is as important in planning, implementing, and sustaining KM initiatives and their desired outcomes.
Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at
www.workingknowledge-csp.com
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Valdis Krebs via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 07:04
To: main@sikm.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion?
>> "People, relationships and trust are at the heart of any great knowledge initiative"
Our experience exactly, Andy! If you do not have the above in place all technology you try will fail.
|
|
|
I appreciate your carefully considered viewpoints Rob
Bill Kaplan
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: main@SIKM.groups.io <main@SIKM.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Robert L. Bogue via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 05:51
To: main@SIKM.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge Management State of the Art: Is KM out of fashion? #maturity #state-of-km
Sorry friends, this isn’t going to be short… Full disclosure, I’ve got a course at KM Institute, I’ve built courses for Microsoft, LinkedIn Learning, etc. I’m also teaching for PMI next year on Change Management.
First, let me take the title – is KM out of fashion. Maybe. Some indicators point to yes but mostly they point to the idea that KM is being absorbed into other disciplines – or it’s being seen as a core requirement that just “magically”
happens. I can say that my experience has been that a decade ago KM seemed like it was dying (beyond falling out of fashion), however, in today’s world, I see it as regaining a degree of interest and relevancy. Is a CEO going to point on the desk and tell
his direct reports and his board that he must have it above everything else? That’s very unlikely. However, are we all aware of the challenges of an aging, increasingly mobile, gig economy, etc., workforce? Yes.
More importantly, let me talk about certifications – or rather let me talk about profession building because I’ve seen a few that have worked and a few that haven’t and what is most important isn’t what anyone wants to hear.
Professions are built based on employers hiring. That’s it. Period. End of story.
Certifications are shortcuts for employers to know that the person they’re hiring can do the job (with a reasonable degree of accuracy.) Certifications are valuable if – and only if – they help employers make employment decisions. Full
stop.
So, what does that mean for a profession? Well, it means that there needs to be a set of core skills that every practitioner can do passably well such that employers want to buy it. There’s got to be a strong, urgent RoI and it can’t
be so soft they don’t understand it. It also has a story because as much as we hate to admit it, we’re emotional creatures and it’s the story that sells us – we rationalize afterwards.
Here’s the rub – we’ve not sold the story. PMI sold the idea that for a project to be successful you need a PMP. They sold the story that there’s a body of knowledge that project managers agree to and know that lead to success. It’s
all hogwash. Projects run by PMP certified project managers still fail at roughly a 70% rate. I’ve never met any PM who knows 70% of what’s in the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBoK). The truth is that if you did everything that’s a “best practice” in the PMBoK
your project is practically guaranteed to fail because it’s way to heavy for most projects. Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices group inside their development division’s slogan was “Proven Practices, Predictable Results.” “Best practice” is the one that fits
the circumstances. Body of Knowledge is the enumeration of the known proven practices – often without a sense for when they should be reused. We need predictability and all of us will cringe to admit that even in our chosen subspecialities the failure rates
are crushing.
If my opinion, if we want to make KM a true profession, we’ve got to get to the core skills that lead to predictable results – or convince the world we’ve got them. The problem with this process – as I’ve seen when building certification
exams is that everyone wants to believe that their unique skill is the unique skill upon which the entire profession is based. Stan Garfield is great at community building, Dave Snowden at decision making and complexity management, Patrick Lambe at taxonomy,
etc. In a room each will advocate that theirs is the most important part of the mix. (These are examples only -- all of them are personally generous people who would be less likely to exhibit this, they’re just examples that I expect everyone will know and
who know me well enough to not take offense at me using them as examples.) The problem is – like most things KM – it’s not that you can remove any one aspect. Make bread and people will tell you flour is the most important – until they leave out yeast or
salt. It doesn’t take much but it’s required.
If we’re going to have a role for KM, we need to decide what skills are necessary – and at what level. We had a problem with expert exams for Microsoft SharePoint. The coverage was too broad. No one knew every pillar – because in practice
no one knew all of them in detail. The passing score had to be really quite low on those exams. We didn’t take into account that awareness, familiarity, and determining applicability were more important than which bit to set. We needed to be more focused
on knowing when you need help – and that doesn’t work well in the context of a certification exam.
Do certificates of completion (note: I’m not calling them certifications) have value? Yes. It means you are likely to have basic awareness. It means that the employer is unlikely to be surprised by something because you’ve been exposed
to the major areas. Is it the same as a certification or as a profession? No, that being said I think the opportunity is ripe to define what the profession is and should be.
In all fairness, one of the other spaces I live and work in is change management. Every organization (including PMI ) thinks they can talk about change management. There are two different industry associations with different agendas.
They don’t truly have a body of knowledge and they have two different certifications that no one cares about. I have like
20 change models (or components) listed on my web site. A colleague mapped another 20 that I’ve not included. It’s too fragmented. The “standard” from one of the bodies is too much PM and
not enough people. They have the same problem in this space where the edges are amorphous, and the people have different perspectives on what is the most important.
Information Governance is a pipe dream that information managers and records managers have had for over a decade now. Though there’s better definition of what it is – in attempts to make everyone happy they’ve included everything except
the kitchen sink. And again … no one can be an expert in all of them. Almost no one is getting certified by either of the two bodies certifying for information governance. For that matter, almost no one is getting information management certifications –
and that’s been around a lot longer by a larger organization. I’ve communicated with them directly on several occasions their challenge is few people hire information manager roles. (Only super-large organizations and they’re <30% of the market in the US
based on statistical data.)
KM isn’t alone in this problem. It’s a persistent issue for people passionate about a topic – but unless and until we draw a connection – and urgent connection – to the bottom line, it’s not going to get addressed.
I was in a conversation with someone recently regarding suicide prevention programs for employers. They suggested that all employers should care about their employees and therefore do an anti-suicide training. I tried (rather unsuccessfully)
to explain that running an organization is about risk management. There’s never enough resources to do everything you want or to manage every risk. If it’s not important – and urgent – it’s not going to be addressed. KM for all of the greatness isn’t urgent
until someone turns in their notice – and that’s too late.
Rob
P.S. If you’re offended because I won’t call KM a profession – please start by defining what makes a profession.
I’d agree with that Bill (and with Kent’s earlier comment).
My rule of thumb for certification is that if you have to
pay for it, then it is worth less (but not necessarily worthless – if it involves training, then there’s a learning opportunity).
But if it truly costs you, then it is far more likely to have value.
This summer, I worked through CILIP’s Fellowship and Chartered Knowledge Manager process. It is peer-reviewed, mentored and evidence-based. It took me around 50 hours to put together a 20,000-word submission. That’s
costly – but the process of pausing to reflect on 25 years of KM practice, of getting to ‘tell my story backwards’... hugely valuable. Stirred a lot of gratitude in me.
- Is CILIP’s KM model perfect? No. But some smart people from this forum have worked hard to refine it.
- Is the process cumbersome? Yes, in places – but feels very similar to Chartership in HR (CIPD).
- Will I use the post-nominals? Very rarely. It feels all bit personalised-car-registration-plate to me – but preferable than the bumper-sticker equivalent of certification.
Hands-up. I’m a post-nominal snob!
Sometimes I sigh inwardly when I see certification programmes-which-you-pay-for-but-can’t-fail, pushed repeatedly in forums like this – but it’s a free country – and in any case, I’m usually
more lurker than contributor here, so who am I to judge? Provided people understand the chasm between certification and chartership, then they can pay their money and take their choice.
Cheers,
Chris
I have shared my view on KM certification over the years and I share the following links that get into the details a bit on the real and perceived value. If one gets value from taking a “certification” course and the “training” that accompanies
it, that is great. Recognize, however, that it is unrealistic to achieve certification within a discipline or practice unless there are educational requirements and experience requirements for that certification grounded in an accredited and accepted body
of knowledge.
Here are the links:
(7)
Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...Yet? | LinkedIn
(7)
(Part II) Practically Speaking, Does Professional Certification in Knowledge Management Exist...How Will You Know It's Real?? | LinkedIn
Best
Bill
Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at
www.workingknowledge-csp.com
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.
Would Patrick Lambe please share his arrow on just why certification schemes like this are a bad idea?
Cynefin Centre & Cognitive Edge
11 Pro
Please excuse predictive text errors and typos
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.
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.
Vice Chairman, KM Institute
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM Martin Dugage <mrdugage@...> wrote:
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,
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
|
|
|
