The new knowledge

David Weinberger gave a fascinating presentation, http://www.kmworld.com/conference/2012/ (last presentation under tab “KMWorld 2012 Keynotes). Well worth the 45 minutes…

He talked about how knowledge is changing. One example he uses is a book vs. a web article. When a book is published it’s a completed product. It’s done and won’t change. It was what we considered knowledge in the past. However, when an article is published on the web, the webpage can be updated, people can link to it, conversation can add or detract from it. He talks about power of the knowledge network that is created around that article.

His insights on taxonomies are also worth considering.  I won't steal his thunder here...

Speaking of a knowledge network, I’d be interested in your thoughts on his presentation

KM and mobile devices

I watched a presentation by Clayton Grigg, CKO for the FBI on their knowledge management program. You can see this and a large number of the KM World presentations at:  http://www.kmworld.com/conference/2012/.

One point that came up during the question and answers was: How do you handle employees using off the shelf technology (i.e. moblile devices such as  I-Pads, smart phones …)? He made a couple of comments that include:

·         People will use this technology. You can’t stop it…

·         These systems are advancing rapidly and can be easier to use and powerful than network systems

·         Users are much more IT savvy and can bring new ideas from using these systems.

·         A big challenge is maintaining security.

·         The KM challenge is how to integrate off the shelf devices with your organization’s IT

The old adage “if you can’t beat them, join them” rings true. I’ve heard from a number of utilities that they’ve started providing field crews with smart phones and/or I-Pads. By providing this technology and providing updates and training they can gain some level of control while providing technology to improve efficiency on the job.  

This point was reinforced as I was updating my website and got a message from GoDaddy (my web host) that my webpage was automatically updated to work on a mobile phone.

Social media and knowledge management

Over the years, I’ve started to use more and more social media tools. My evolution started with this blog in 2004, then on to my songwriting blog, joining MySpace to share music, Google/Yahoo Groups, and now LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Wanting to use it more efficiently, I just finished my certification as a Social Media Specialist from the Social Media Magic University.

In thinking about social media and knowledge management I saw Venkatesh Rao's thought provoking article about Social Media vs. Knowledge Management: A Generational War. Reading the comments alone show how effective social media can be in sharing knowledge. The article talks about a conflict between knowledge management and social media, which he attributes to generational differences.

What's important about the article is thinking about where social media fits into a KM strategy and the barriers to its acceptance. Social media is still relatively new, and I think conflict is typical of any change or innovation. Early adopters embrace the new technology, late adopters wait until all the bugs are out and they are forced into it. For example, KM is just getting started in some industries. When I started blogging in 2004 it was unheard of in my industry. So the potential barrier is the stage of innovation for the person or industry.

My opinion is that social media is a knowledge management tool. It is very effective when working with external groups and with open communities. The yellow pages/expert locator function is excellent for people outside my traditional network. The discussion and informal nature, along with the sound bite mentality encourages flow of more tacit knowledge. It’s also great for knowledge sharing outside my circle.

On the other hand, social media is not great for capturing, storing, and protecting knowledge. This is especially true for key business knowledge. Managers still (justifiably so) are concerned with content or opinions expressed without their knowledge. Copyright issues and other terms of service still need to be carefully considered. Evaluating the quality of knowledge and who’s an expert is another big issue.

So like any tool in the toolbox, it all comes down to what is your strategy? What are you trying to achieve? What are the pros and cons of each tool?

KM lesson - returing man to the moon

Picture this scenario: You’re in a rush to beat a competitor to achieve a very complicated goal. Tons of pressure is being applied to accomplish the goal first. You assemble the best of the best, and use a variety of large and small contractors to help you. After tons of trial and error, you complete it, have a huge success, win accolades, and then move on to another project. 35 years later, you’re asked to do the same thing without reinventing the wheel. Could you do it?

This is the case with NASA’s Ares project, taking man back to the moon 35 years after the fact. Weird Science did a great show titled space junkyard. It’s worth seeing from a knowledge management perspective.

A few points that were clear:
· In the rush and the pressure to accomplish, KM was not a priority.
· There was no central repository of all the files and data. Drawing still exist, but not the why (tacit knowledge) things were done that way was not captured.
· Much of the spacecraft was used in accomplishing the mission and remained in space. That’s why the junkyard is so important. NASA can reverse engineer some parts. The problem is they are working on final products, with no knowledge about the mistakes made along the way.
· Many of the contractors have gone out of business, their knowledge is gone.
· NASA engineers moved on to different projects or private companies soon after the mission. After 35 years, I’m sure most have long since retired.
· The problems and challenges remain the same and while there have been major advances in technology, the engineering is basically the same. In other words the same knowledge needed in 1969, is the knowledge needed today.

A Washington Post article describes the “Saga of the Lost Space Tapes.” The story gives another example about the missing lunar video tapes. They weren’t used much following the mission and for a variety of reasons (cumbersome, highly specialized format) were archived, moved, and eventually misplaced.

Can you blame NASA? Of course in hindsight people do, but at the time, in the rush of the space race, I’m sure 99.9% of us would be in the same place. What’s impressive to me is that NASA learned from this and has developed an excellent knowledge management program.

Winning proposals

A few months ago I was on a committee to award a project. We had about five teams that could have easily done the job, what separated them was their ability to transfer knowledge. In the proposals and presentations a few quick things jumped out at me,

1) Proposals are a reflection of what you will produce. Examples that I didn't like were:
- Proposals that did not focus on the end product (more on this later)
- The first 20 pages were on the team (see comment above)
- Small things that made it difficult to read the proposals i.e. small font, colored boxes that hid the text, pamphlets and loose information that fell out.

2) During the presentations, the most important thing is that the reviewers like you and want to work with you.
- If you are a team, present as a team (often one person takes over the conversation too much)
- Don't try to oversell optional items. One team lost because they spent 60% of their time, saying we need this additional item.
- All of your team need to be strong presenters, not just the principals. The team I voted for had the best #3 person (the one who would do all the work).
- Prepare, prepare ....

Winning proposals is about who can best transfer knowledge, saying as clearly as possbile how you will best meet the requestors need.

In my consulting practice, I started working with teams preparing proposals. It's great to help technical experts. They know their subject area, but not necessarily transferring their knowledge into winning proposals.