When last did you delve into a lengthy KM framework document? Been following the progress of Standards Australia's efforts? (BTW you have to buy this one). Are you a fan of the Frid framework from the Canadian Institute of Knowledge Management (V3.0)? Perhaps you have worked your way through Hubert Saint-Onge's "Leveraging Knowledge for value creation - a framework to guide the formulation and implementation of a knowledge strategy"? Maybe IBM's CBI Knowledge Management - a real business guide is your forte? You may be a fan of the European KM Forums, many publications? The KMCI's KLC could be the framework you most identify with?
"To date, guides for good KM practices have been developed. Chairman for the British Standards Institution (BSI) and CEN KM Standards Committee, Mr Ronald Young informed the participants of the development of the PAS2001 – Knowledge Management: A Guide to Good Practice. Mr James Thomson, Projects Manager of Standards Australia International (SAI) also shared that a handbook “Knowledge Management: A Framework for Succeeding in the Knowledge Era” has been published by SAI."
"The difference between a successful and unsuccessful organisation is not the processes or the quality standards. The things that make a difference are the ability to make timely decisions and the ability to create the space for innovation. This is actually what knowledge management is about," said Mr Snowden.Source
Assumptions and prescriptions
What strikes me about all these frameworks is they are almost all the same and they miss the boat as Dave Snowden says. Take a look:
* What is knowledge, what is KM?
* The context and the current drivers
* Why you need a framework, stress alignment with business goals
* Their particular process: some variation of find, capture, validate, distribute, share & feedback
* They all recommend some technology and/or communities of practice
* Follow some well-worn track - lessons learned, best practices, peer assists
* How to track & measure knowledge assets and a focus on various 'capitals'
* The benefits
What they seem to miss:
* No way to identify, deal or work with tacit knowledge
* No appreciation for emergence, intuition or handling exceptions
* Little thought given to cultivating awareness, innovation, creativity and learning from failure
* Few ways to learn socially, collaboratively or in community
* KMs contribution to agility, listening to customers, business intelligence and understanding markets is minimal
* The importance of relationships and personal identity in knowledge flows and exchanges is unrecognized.
Resources:
KMCI's The new knowledge management
Standard Australia's Interim KM standard
BSI Knowledge Management - A Guide to Good Practice
Paradigm change in knowledge management
So what do you think?
[Warning - gross generalisation follows]
Trouble is that many of the people who are into creating over complicated frameworks and burying KM under the weight of over elaborate theory are the same kinds of people who built and maintained the mechanistic view of organisations taht many of us are trying to get away from!
Posted by: Euan | October 23, 2003 at 07:47 AM