1 of 73

Training workshop on Knowledge Management for Senior Staff & Management in Agriculture and Rural Development

KMSMARD

Prepared by Jaap Pels KennisKlussen/ KnowledgeWorks

Organised by CTA - Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP - EU

Facilitated by <name trainer>

2 of 73

Introduction to KM

Part 1: Opening session / Speed date

3 of 73

Speed dating rounds

Three round 5 minutes

What is your current job / function?
Which training in the past did you like the most / has made a significant change for you?
Question Which knowledge did you share recently in a network?

Group work 4 or 6 people 10 minutes

Formulate first thoughts about the coming two days

Plenary 10 minutes

Capture the harvest (grouping exercise)

To be learned: to get to know each other; build trust

Instruction speed dating.

Tell participants to start talking to a (sort of) stranger.

Facilitator whistle or indicate ‘changer’.

Group work is now based on what participants heard from others also!

Group work gives just enough basis for trust-building during course group work or performance / presenting.

Facilitator might develop a repertoire to enhance vertical communications, as equals, making errors / mistakes / fun remarks.

Some patterns - like people dominating the discourse / plenary -, but also the power issues in a group for example because both women and men participate.

Not every facilitator fitz every audience / participant group.

To capture are quotes, verbs, perhaps expectations when labeled such by participants.

Some participants feel comfortable to work with fears and expectations to come back to at the end of the course / workshop; when noticed build that into programme.

Stress that course is a journey participants help navigate; it is their course / workshop not the facilitators’ :-).

In Trainer’s Pocketbook by John Townsend a Facilitraining Rainbow by Paul Donoven & John Townsend is presented which is a facilitators’ cheat sheet.

See http: / / www.pocketbook.co.uk / pdf / 9781903776162.pdf and http: / / www.amazon.com / Trainers-Pocketbook-John-Townsend / dp / 1906610541 and next slide.

4 of 73

Target group

Senior staff and management of Agricultural and Rural Development (ARD), who need to address information management and knowledge exchange and be able to lead a knowledge management intervention.

Participation model proposed: Ideally, each organization / network / target group is ideally represented by two senior staff members or a combination of a (supervising) senior manager with a (managing) KM staff or a (supervising) senior manager with a manager of a KM initiative. Alternatively, pairs will be formed by people coming from similar organizations / networks during the workshop.

A journey.

To be learned: what the target audience for KMSMARD is

KMSMARD has a complement course called KM4ARD.

Where the complement KM training workshop organised by CTA addresses more content / operational staff.

This KMSMARD one addresses managerial staff.

The thinking here is that the target group is having hierarchical tasks and / or responsibilities; they have a certain decision power / have influence / want to steer directions and decisions made.

KM interventions need to be anchored in the hierarchical top of the organization to last and succeed.

This at least is one of the lessons by Sveiby - see below.

Lessons from the Pioneers (See http: / / www.providersedge.com / docs / km_articles / KM_-_Lessons_from_the_Pioneers.pdf Sveiby)

1. Enthusiastic Champions

2. ...build on Existing Core Competence

3. They Address an Urgent Strategic Imperative

4. ...with Firm Commitment from the Top...

5. Early Quick Wins Neutralise the Nay-sayers.

5 of 73

Objectives KMSMARD

Overall

To expose the participants to the KM (knowledge management) discipline and global discourse on KM, to enable them to initiate or lead KM activities within their network(s) and organization.

Specific objectives

By the end of the two day training, participants will be able to:

Understand the KM discipline from various perspectives; what is KM about?
Appreciate KM in own networks and organization; the value of KM
Work through a structured approach to KM
Getting practical in group-work on KM interventions

To be learned: what KMSMARD is about

Key is to enable participants to initiate or lead KM activities.

For this they are exposed to the KM discipline and the global discourse on KM - preliminary KM4Dev and KB forum next to numerous initiatives on LinkedIn and probably also within sectors and or bigger organization (e.g. UNICEF).

The KM discipline starts with the history to put some time-perspective in what has been labelled ‘KM’ as of the 80-ties of the 20-ties century.

It has to become clear the KM discipline use a typical vocabulary, models, fads, metaphors, tools and methods (of which this course is one example!!), but also rubbish.

KM has become a sector with commercial companies offering the government, private sector and NGO’s thoughts and services on KM; also in ARD.

During the course we zoom in using different lenses on KM and share thoughts on models, metaphors, methods, tools and efforts practicing KM.

The participants are taken along in trial and error learning on KM.

For this a safe space is needed; that is why this session is preceded by speed-dating.

Links are made between KM and participants network / organization day-to-day practices.

For the objectives a spectrum of issues will pop-up, like:

Understand how to put KM in historic perspective
Identify ways in which KM is supporting organizational objectives
Evaluate KM models and apply them for their own workplace
Classify KM interventions with appropriate tools and methods
Discern KM at personal, organizational and network level
Show leadership in KM planning within the workplace

The training workshop starts from the organizational setting participants come from.

From their we will explore a broader perspective and look into KM in networks.

Also we will explore the narrower perspective of personal KM.

KM starts from / builds on a ‘strategic intend’ stemming from organizational objectives; see the lessons KM pioneers..�It is therefore crucial participants are aware of mission, vision and objectives of the organization at hand.

With all due respect, mission, vision etc are often collateral flagship information products.

Because of pressure on (labour / development) markets or financing (like charity) mechanisms KM is influenced by the private sector.

With that the scale of KM capacity enhancement widened and KM - spronging from organizational sciences - is wrapped as service and product.

Digging deeper into goals and objectives of institutions at hand - e.g. ARD sector players - must reveal a primary process, a ‘raison d’etre’ - however simple.

Complementary; institutions run secondary processes to support the primary.

Zooming on these processes and matching them with monitoring, budgeting, evaluation, correction (balanced scorecard) must shed light where what sort of KM is at hand or whether the focus should be on KS (Knowledge Sharing) or IM (Information Management) or else.

Also important is to know / figure out if the primary process is about ‘doing the things right’ (effective / efficient) or ‘doing the right things’.

The latter is about what is called ‘second loop’ learning.

Also here is a grasp needed on relations between M&E (Monitoring & Evaluation) or M&L (Monitoring & Learning) and how all of the above fits strings of concepts and vocabulary like ‘input, throughput, output, outcome and impact’.

KM activities need a model representing how we think people, process, technology, knowledge and information etc fit together.�We model how the KM sub-activities will be phased, link, link back and succeed each other.

�At the end of the day a KM initiative is run within time and budget to produce output, outcome and impact among which learning.

KM is not new and lots of wheels (also square ones) have been (re)invented already.�The course will also dwell on how to make the right combination ‘intervention - tool / method’.�This will help participants to have an effective discussions with consultants and (KM) staff.

As lessons from the KM pioneers learn, KM activities need leadership to ‘survive’ organizational turmoil.

�Participants need to be able to share a thorough story on a KM initiative they initiate and / or lead.

During the course there will be room for composing and practicing an elevator pitch or present a KM plan on a napkin.

Both exercises force participants to be concise in analysis, representation and story.

6 of 73

Ground rules

Timing 09:00 - 12:30 and 14:00 - 17:00

Coffee / tea in between and on the go

Minimal email / internet / phone use

<name> facilitators

<name> course lead

<name> lead assistance

<name> observer / other roles

7 of 73

Program KMSMARD

Day 1	Day 2
Morning (9.00 - 12.30 hrs)	Morning (9.00 - 12.30 hrs)
Unit 1 - Welcome \| Introduction to KM \| Setting the scene Knowledge Management Tour d’horizon KM vocabulary / DIKW Evolution of KM Models and metaphors on KM KM tree in detail / KM scan Key: what is KM about?	Unit 3 - Choosing KM methods and tools \| KM interventions Planning Knowledge Management Recap & Cheat sheets Group work Using Cynefin / Binney / Jarche Personal, organizational & networks KM Key: structured approach to KM.
Afternoon (14.00 - 17.00 hrs)	Afternoon (14.00 - 17.00 hrs)
Unit 2 - KM supporting organizational goals \| Organizations and Networks \| Knowledge Management @ work KM is peoples business Primary / secondary process Group work Key: the value of KM.	Unit 4 - ‘Making the case for KM’ \| Closure�Knowledge Management to practice @ home KM elevator / sales pitch KM plan on a napkin Plenary presentations Reflections / Take home Key: getting practical for KM interventions.

To be learned: the proram

Please notice this is a two day training / workshop. That means we have to go through a lot of material with big steps.

We start with a short introduction to delve immediately into organizational objectives where KM has to give support.

Just as development, KM is a ‘people’s business’ and technic is a tool, it helps.

From there we jump to see how KM works in action, in reality and scope, methods and tools.

The last half day we devote to getting practical in participants own environment and experiment with learnings.

The program is tight in schedule.and steep in learning curve, we aim for output in the next two days. I think we can do it.

On KM in the 80ties:

Sveiby: Some lament this lack of cohesion and absence of a formal all-encompassing theoretical framework. I believe it is a strength. The concept of Knowledge Management is unusual in its ambiguity, extraordinary in its depth, unfathomable in its rapid expansion and – best of all – it has no single owner. From a few seeds planted by a few of us a decade and a half ago, framework and the practices are now growing exponentially through the efforts of hundreds of thousands of practitioners and thinkers worldwide who practice what they teach in a very broad range of pioneering experiments. The sharing of knowledge about KM is unprecedented in history. KM is a LINUX of management concepts. A “Movement” of people round the globe connected and contactable via the Net.

See page 6 http: / / www.providersedge.com / docs / km_articles / KM_-_Lessons_from_the_Pioneers.pdf

8 of 73

Learning Generalist

Grandmasters practice with peers and then

reflect on what they did.

This is the way grandmasters learn.

This is the way hackers practice their trade.

See: http: / / www.learninggeneralist.com

Ground rules / Sign up for AAR

9 of 73

Buzz labeling the ?

To be learned: people use different words for the same and the same words for different things

This is a picture / quiz that appeared on LinkedIn, the social network for professionals.

It started as network for financial professionals but nowadays all kind of professionals are on this network.

It has numerous groups also on (rural and agricultural) development.

It is recommended to join.

Have a look at the picture and buzz with your neighbour what the ‘?’ might represents.

Collect some suggestions from the participants and discuss along the two following slides.

Points to make:

We all come from different background, different perspectives, different images, metaphors.
So we all use different representations like this one.
Still there will be a sort of agreement what would fit the ?
Most probably ‘network’ and ‘wisdom’ will be mentioned; two completely different categories.
Point is to align in vocabulary and images and metaphors during this KM course; KM has a specific vocabulary.

Advanced use: what might be left to ‘information’? This might bridge to the slide on DIKW

See http: / / www.wordle.net / show / wrdl / 7676372 / Naveen_Bisht for the result (or click the Wordle in the next slide)

10 of 73

Some over 800 answers ....

Big Picture
Bits & Bits & Bits
Bla Bla
Borg
Brain
Buckyballs
Business

Deliberately not filtering out the duplicates. For example ‘Wisdom’ has been voted for over a hundred times, also resulting in the biggest word in the Wordle (next slide), but what does that say?

It counted 369 unique suggestions. Enjoy. Reading the list is fun.

The over 800 reactions are listed at: https: / / docs.google.com / document / d / 1zkuATOKjGIKu5k196g7Yo1ILNUhN_SC6HES8AqWdPls / edit?usp=sharing

Some examples:

Knowledge Management
Knowledge Network
Knowledge Network And Connections
Knowledge Sharing
Knowledge Sharing / Communication
Knowledge Transfer:)
Knowledge With Practical Experience

11 of 73

Wordle of over 800 answers

To be learned: the variances in wording

The gist of the game is that different people have different associations reading from left to right ‘information, knowledge, ...’.

Language is very very important for people to work together and initiate / lead / process a KM intervention.

In the next minutes we will research some language.

It is absolutely important people speak the same language, use the same words and have the same understanding on KM vocabulary.

Room for a remark / question from the participants.

Advanced musing: The small image (http: / / www.brainpickings.org / 2013 / 11 / 18 / the-tiny-book-of-tiny-stories-3 / ) shows more dots and connections.

The text is: ‘Stars do not change; constellations do’, they go through constant transformation (link to 3rd generation Learning Loops)

It tells big amounts of stars form constellations.

Those constellations might be the ‘KM gems’; scan your network for combinations.

Keep in mind we depict knowledge here as placeholders (humans?) and connections.

12 of 73

DIKW framework

To be learned: the differences and what holds a number of concepts together.

Example food prices:

Words like "data," "information," and "knowledge" are often used interchangeably. But there are some important differences:

Data is a specific fact or figure, without any context. For example, the number 1,000 is a piece of data, as is the name Tom Smith. Without anything else to define them, these two items of data are meaningless.
Information is data that's organized. So, pieces of information are "Tom Smith is a farmer" and "1,000 rice varieties." We have more details, so now the data makes more sense to us.
Knowledge, then, builds on the information to give us context. Knowledge is "Tom Smith is the biggest farmer Africa, and his company ships 1,000 rice varieties every month."

You can collect data on food prices at farmers and on the market. You will have to ‘normalize’ them for quantity and quality. You put them in a table and thus create information. From there you will be able to establish ‘the best buy’ and ‘good choice’ plus perhaps on what market which foods generate the best revenue and you can calculate what the transportation costs are. When you make sense out of all that information you create knowledge which can be the basis to

What is Knowledge? Source: http: / / www.mindtools.com / pages / article / newISS_87.htm

Knowledge management matters because it forms the link between information (based on data) and action; knowledge makes information actionable or – as some say – knowledge is information in use.

Knowledge resides in peoples heads – it is a non tangible. Some KM thinkers state that knowledge only shows itself in conversations in discourse. Given that perspective, knowledge management is about shaping the facilitating, the sense:making, the interaction and collaboration of social entities and human beings.

Snowden: The diagram above was used by John Poindexter when he introduced the technology session last week at the IRAHS Symposium. This event brought together a really interesting and diverse range of people from all over the world. John used the diagram to provide a general context for the presentations and discussions that followed. I scribbled it down, produced the slide during one less than interesting presentation, then got permission over lunch to use it for this blog. Now my first reaction negative; I have a long standing hostility to the Data:Information:Knowledge:Wisdom hierarchy. However this time, there was no use of the dreaded wisdom word, a pretension that reaches its worst excess with people claiming to be experts in wisdom management. I was also curious about the linking of sense:making and path:finding, and if I needed no other reason to pay attention, then my considerable respect for John’s thinking provided the motive. Listening and thinking made the model more attractive and also suggested some variations that I will work on over the next few months so consider this an initial reflection.

So let’s work through the stages:

Analysis: data to information

Here the model follows convention: myself, Prusak and many others have used this definition. We have a mess of unstructured data to which we apply structure or interpretation in order to inform others, we put the data in context. Raw accounting data lacks context, until we put it into the form of a report. Prusak used to have a good way of explaining this; he talked about messages. If I structure data through process of abstraction and possibly codification then I create messages with which I seek to inform someone else. If that person understands the message they are informed; however if there is no shared context between message creator and message receiver then we are left with data, no information is created.

So we can take that as read, however the interesting addition here is to identify that process as analysis. In the intelligence world this is the process of classifying raw data to provide a context in which the data can be used. The analyst is immersed in the data itself. They are dealing with material at a low level and if the data fits their expertise, and the people they have to brief share the same context then things work. The problem (well one of the problems) is that the context is rarely shared. The ability to work with raw data, is not necessary the same as the ability to see the bigger picture and weak signals, seemingly insignificant material, is easy to ignore.

Sense:making: information to knowledge

Now I have historically argued that knowledge is the means by which we create information out of data. Given that this only happens when shared context then knowledge management can be defined as providing shared context. Now this is not too far away from understanding what the information means and my general definition of sense:making, namely how do we make sense of the world so we can act in it. I think I might be prepared to refine my original opinion here. In the majority of cases in KM, decision makers are making sense of information rather than data and a degree of common context is assumed. I like the idea here of asking what the information means, avoiding assumptions. However I also think that it will be important to get back, in context to the original raw data. That is something we have worked on with the SenseMaker™ software, moving from representation to originating data without intervening stages. As I play with this model over the next few weeks I am going to look at some extra arrows and labels to make this and other points.

Path:finding: knowledge to options

Now the model starts to get interesting, and I sense a trace of one of the best decision models of recent years, Boyd’s OODA loop. Once we have a sufficiency of information, or rather comprehension of information they we are in a position to determine options. I like the idea of calling this path:finding. It has that sense of experimental journeys, the fail safe experimentation that is for me a necessary feature of decision making in a complex space. This path finding creates options, which will have different risk factors and will represent different levels of threat and opportunity. Of course pathfinding will require mini:cycles of analysis and sense:making as we start the journey. I am not sure that we can fully separate path finding from execution (or from sense:making for that matter).

Execution: options to action

Neither am I sure that we can completely separate action form pathfinding or sense:making. In a more complex space the micro:loops around the model are going to come into play as each step will produce more data, create different contexts for existing information and give us additional insights. However in a formal decision environment these stages are separated. Options are presented to senior decision makers who determine actions. As the model indicates, actions initiate new data and we have to iterate the model. Now, as in market options, the knowledge that an option is being considered, or that an action has been taken changes the space. Given that multiple actions and options from multiple players will all be interacting at any point in time the situation is complex and we will have to move beyond a linear model.

WHERE IS THIS GOING

Now I think the way I want to go with this is to take the operators (analysis, sense:making, path:finding & execution) and arrange them as a type of OODA loop with different input / outputs. I also want to look at creating more direct linkages between the output / input types (data, information, knowledge, options, actions) as interacting with the operators, but with the operators intersecting with more than one input and one output. The amount of intersections would of course depend on the degree of complexity in the decision environment. In the mean time I think the model is a considerable improvement over the D:I:K:W chain and offers more possibilities.

Further reading: http: / / wiki.km4dev.org / DIKW_model One of the most active discussions in the long time (and on KM4DEV that is not insignificant), this discussion started on the fringes of a discussion about 'Knowledge generation, what / where / why?' on 1 February 2010 when a member on the list referred to the old DIKW model (data:information:knowledge:wisdom). References to this model really triggered a flurry (and fury) of emails, particularly after Dave Snowden's intervention, dismissing the model as irrelevant and dangerous and stating that 'Anyone talking about wisdom as a higher level of knowledge should be taken out and shot for the good of the field'.

13 of 73

DIK Weggeman

14 of 73

DIKW: These are too simple!

:-)

15 of 73

Buzz DIKW GODIN

16 of 73

People, Process & Technology

To be learned: a simple approach to KM

The ‘People Process Technology’ (PPT) model of an organization is used a lot but where is the knowledge?

The factor, ‘view at’ or ‘going in position’ is: influence of technology increases.

Some considerations why technology influence is intensifying:

3 BILLIONTH person to come online in early 2015, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/06/three_billionth_person_to_come_online_in_early_2015/

Organizational staff is engaged in networks on a personal basis; @home or Internet Café or by Phone they are connected. .

PS That is why they should be encouraged to join LinkedIn

PS This is also a generational issue.

Still, PPT is a good model or set of first perspectives to consider the organizational / network perspectives.

These are in line with organizational objectives stemming from vision and mission.

Lots of processes are demanded to become transparent with a lot of information management; example GODIN.

The data must be entered (forms) or programmed to be entered (jobs / scanners etc).

See https: / / tagboard.com / KennisKlussen / 163947 for a hashtag grabber as technology instant process to search (a part of) the web for the hashtag #KennisKlussen (KnowledgeWorks).

This hashtag-lined overview is the web based file memory of the company KnowledgeWorks | KennisKlussen. Can be text, video etc etc.

What would the participants say about using this module plus ask them which knowledge as they know it must be managed.

The latter because this is a workshop on Knowledge Management’.

Assignment see next.

See on DIKW, PPT also: http: / / www.aivaconknowledgeservices.com / documents / intotoKM.pdf

17 of 73

PPT web pictures

:-)

18 of 73

Buzz PPT

19 of 73

Buzz

Digital

literacy

To be learned: influence of technology in particularly on people (but also on process)

Points to make:

Centre: operational skills; how to operate digital devices and IT based (social) media
Information Management left
Collaboration top right
Personal development top
....

Managers / management cannot close eyes on the advantages and use of digital literacy by staff.

Simple example:

a staff able to operate a corporate EventBrite account can help tremendous in organising an event.�See https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/l/online-event-registration-software/
financial staff able to operate excel can make better / smarter / more difficult budgets
researchers can benefit from literature web-services like Mendeley and Research Gate.�See https://www.mendeley.com and http://www.researchgate.net/about
ICT and web 2.0 immensely increase possibilities to interact; conference tweets, blogs, KM4Dev etc .
How about farmers participatory video?
Any suggestions by participants here...

Note: make participants buzz on the various terms mentioned and the position of them.

Question: is digital literacy a form of knowledge; knowledge to traverse and navigate the digital space(s).

Question: is personal knowledge management build on digital literacy?

Answer: yes partly / great deal / younger generation! / attitude (Weggeman Knowledge is function of Information and skills (digital literacy) and experience and attitude.

20 of 73

Peter Drucker

A new way of thinking about Knowledge:

“Knowledge is an asset we need to manage”

21 of 73

History / KM generations 1

Nancy Dixon

To be learned: the evolution of KM

Point to make: development, history of KM discipline.

Nancy Dixon in a KM thinker / presenter / consultant. Here is her overview of the various KM generations.�The slides must be looked at closely because there is a lot of detail to tell about / discuss with or in the group.

Mid 95:s:

World Bank to become a Knowledgebank; �PS Anno 2015 the World Bank aspires to become a Solution Bank
‘Stock’ approach;
supported (instigated) by IT; databases, Intranet; knowledge is a ‘thing’;
knowledge (management) == information (management)

The 00:s:

KM == K...M == Knowledge Sharing & Information Management ‘Flow’ approach;
Community of Practice;
Team efforts

The 05:s:

KM focus on (social) learning ‘Context’ based;
rediscovery ‘oral history’ and ‘story telling’; (micro narratives used by Cynefin http://www.sensemaker-suite.com)
supported by social software / Web 3.0

1^st generation: information: Focus on IT, data (BPR, SAP, MIS); gradually developing into information management�2^nd generation: knowledge: Focus op people, knowledge sharing, community of practice / practitioners�3^rd generation: learning: Focus on learning, co:creation, context�

No leapfrogging

August 01, 2010 The Three Eras of Knowledge Management – Summary Nancy Dixon

http: / / www.nancydixonblog.com / 2010 / 08 / the:three:eras:of:knowledge:management:summary.html

Advanced: Try and fit the PPT and the Context, Frame, Action, Outcome learning loop.

22 of 73

Dixon: 1st Eras of KM

1995

2000

2008

Information Management – Leveraging Explicit Knowledge – Internet

Capturing documents
Best practice repositories
Lessons learned databases

Enhancing individual learning for increased employee capability

2015

Connect people to content

23 of 73

Standardization of practices
Reduction in the duplication of effort
The perception that KM yields few results
We’ve only been looking at explicit knowledge. What about the tacit knowledge in peoples’ heads?
Knowledge is not a stable commodity, it changes rapidly

Leveraging Explicit Knowledge

To be learned: see points

Point to make: Explicit knowledge (== Information) and bridge to next slide on knowledge types.

Point to make: Knowledge is something really different form Information.

Buzz about if participants recognize the two black lines.

Preempt: If your organization is about Information (management) play down knowledge management.

Nancy Dixon: “It is old thinking to believe that if individuals become more competent, the organization will be more effective.

It is team that are the unit of learning.

People had spent a great deal of money on these systems and with some notable exceptions were seeing little use of them.

KM had not lived up to its promise. Search systems were not very good.

And as documents accumulated it became difficult to find anything useful - 15,000 cases that software engineers have written and for the most part no one reads them. We began to hear around 1998, 99 that KM was dead“

24 of 73

Buzz: Tacit, Explicit and Implicit

Tacit – this is the knowledge in our heads that is made up from experience and personal contexts. It’s not written down and is hard to articulate. A worker at an oil rig knew there was a drilling failure by the feeling of the vibrations at a certain spot on the platform. To transfer that knowledge he took others out to that spot and showing them the feel of that vibration as it was happening and explaining what that meant.�Apprenticeships, mentoring, and sometimes video documenting are good ways to tap into another’s tacit knowledge.
Explicit – this is the knowledge that is documented and accessible in one way or another where others can find it!
Implicit – this is knowledge that isn’t written down yet but is largely procedural and not dependent on an individual’s context (do not pick your nose).

25 of 73

Dixon: 2nd Eras of KM

1995

2000

2008

Information Management – Leveraging Expicit Knowledge – Internet

Capturing documents
Best practice repositories
Lessons learned databases

Enhancing individual learning for increased employee capability

2015

Experience Management – Leveraging Tacit Knowledge - www

Communities of practice
Expertise locators
Team / Project learning – before, during, and after
Conversational-based processes

Supporting horizontal knowledge sharing for productivity improvement

Connect people to people

To be learned: see points

Points to make: read closely al vocabulary and check back with participants for understanding

Nancy Dixon: “ team or project learning – seeking the movement of tacit knowledge”.

Again zoom in on the yellow box.

Focus on experience(s) where people share knowledge, leverage tacit knowledge and use the web - I associate ‘www’ with (world wide) web.

In essence the block tells me to get the right people together and arrange roles in various work forms like a CoP, team, AAR sessions etc.

So if your business is about peoples competence, tacit knowledge or experience - all people based knowledge involved; CoPs, teams etc might be a suggestion however - given the positioning - such is founded upon Information Management. Indeed - as Dixon mentioned - ‘the complexity increases’.

We will come back to complex environments.

26 of 73

Dixon: 3 Eras of KM

1995

2000

2008

Information Management – Leveraging Expicit Knowledge – Internet

Capturing documents
Best practice repositories
Lessons learned databases

Enhancing individual learning for increased employee capability

Experience Management – Leveraging Tacit Knowledge - www

Communities of practice
Expertise locators
Team / Project learning – before, during, and after
Conversational-based processes

Supporting horizontal knowledge sharing for productivity improvement

Idea Management – Leveraging Analytic Knowledge – Web 2.0

Using collective knowledge to:

address complex Issues
create new knowledge
grow innovation
co-creation

Enablers: Cognitive diversity, transparency and convening
Processes: Collective sensemaking and crowdsourcing

Opening vertical knowledge exchange for organizational learning

Collection

Conversation

Connection

2015

Integrating Ideas

To be learned: see points

Points to make: read closely al vocabulary and check back with participants for understanding

Dixon: “All are needed – and we get better at Information management and experience management – we are just starting to understand Idea Management”.

Again here the foundation upon people sharing / exchanging knowledge and information management.

Read the bullet points and check if participants are on board.

The aim is organizational learning by opening vertical knowledge exchange.

PS Vertical is up / down hierarchies; flattening hierarchies, working in (temporary) (project) teams might help for vertical knowledge exchange.

Advanced: incubators and piloting creates a closed, flat, functional hierarchy where knowledge kan ‘flout’ and where information is easily shared.

There is a global call to become more open in sharing information. IATA is an example for development.

27 of 73

Leaders convene the conversations but do not control the content or outcome
New knowledge / innovation is created through the intersection of ideas from different disciplines
No single person, no matter how intelligent or highly placed, is smart enough to deal with the wicked / complex problems organizations now face
Knowledge workers who are involved in doing the work have insight into how to construct a solution to the problems

Dixon’s way of thinking on Knowledge

28 of 73

Collective Sensemaking

Collective Sensemaking is a conversational event where people intentionally come together for the purpose of using their varied perspectives and cognitive abilities to make sense of an issue or problem they are mutually facing.

29 of 73

Ron Heifetz

The power of the leader to address adaptive challenges does not lie in inventing solutions,

rather it lies in using leadership authority to convene the conversations. Ron Heifetz

To be learned: role participants (senior staff and management NOT executing KM interventions

Point to make: A definition of what the participants could do as leaders.

Advanced: link management / leadership to learning loop output / context and Cynefin order / disorder.

PS See for this slides on Learning Loops and Cynefin.

Wikipedia: Ronald Heifetz (b. February 7, 1951) is the King Hussein bin Talal Senior Lecturer in Public Leadership, Founding Director of the Center for Public Leadership ^[1] at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, and co-founder of Cambridge Leadership Associates.^[2]

Known for his seminal work during the past three decades on the practice and teaching of leadership, his research focuses on how to build adaptive capacity in societies, businesses, and nonprofits. His book Leadership Without Easy Answers (Belknap/Harvard University Press, 1994) has been translated into many languages and is currently in its 13th printing. He also coauthored the bestselling book Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive through the Dangers of Leading with Marty Linsky (Harvard Business School Press, 2002). His most recent book, ""The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization""(Harvard University Press, 2009). A sequel to ""Leadership On The Line"", it provides a more hands-on approach to identifying personal and organizational practices related to mobilizing organizations around adaptive challenges.

30 of 73

Cheat sheet Patti Anklam

To be learned: close history / evolution part

Point to make: get the vocabulary into a table (more to follow!!)

First generation: knowledge is a thing, an object, something you can transfer.

You will hear people speak about ‘knowledge transfer’ which sounds a bit odd.

Explicit knowledge includes things that you can easily pass on to someone else by teaching it or putting it into a database or a book.

Explaining your company's safety protocols to a new team member is demonstrating explicit knowledge.

Tacit knowledge is less quantifiable.

It's when you know that your company's best client won't make a deal unless you go golfing with her – or when you know that your department's smallest supplier is also the most reliable one, but only if you place your order by the 15th of every month.

This is knowledge that's most often learned by experience. It's the stuff you know, but don't necessarily know that you know.

The second generation recognises knowledge resides in peoples heads.

If ll staff leaves the office they take with them all knowledge!

Last, the third generation KM thinkers realised the importance of shaping (managing!) an environment enabling knowledge to emerge.

So, sometimes it is ‘just’ a matter of grabbing the right people in one room; brainstorming, brown bag sessions, scenario planning etc.

In plain English having a conversation.

PS Where Dixon uses ‘analytical knowledge’ Anklam calls that ‘Emergent’.

31 of 73

Tapping into your tacit knowledge

32 of 73

KM working definition

Knowledge is a Capacity to act (E. Sveiby)

Knowledge is Information in use (K. Shordt)

KM is managing capacity to act / information in use

33 of 73

Learning loops

To be learned: see points

Points to make:

loop 1 ‘Reacting’ is day-to-day business, it is what managers manage, doing things right, can become fire fighting
loop 2 ‘Reframing’ is what takes leadership; doing the right things; probably need change (management)
loop 3 ‘Transforming’ needs thorough reflection on context.

PS Notice ‘Actions - Outcomes’ fit the ‘normal’ way of working: input, throughput, output, outcome, impact

PS Later in the course this will come back.

Three questions that will guide the participants to understand learning loops? you need to know what loop you are in; #improving, #reframing or #transforming. I guess its about innovative #processes, #programs / #projects and #business respective.

The more you go to the left the less degree of freedom you have, the bigger the inertia

Action and outcomes are in more models used but then as ‘opportunity / plan - input - throughput - action - outcome - impact’.

Going to the next level includes (self-) reflection; am I doing the things right, am I doing the right things; tactical versus strategic.

So you are very good at providing seeds - doing things right -, but how about what seed to whom or what price etc is it - the right thing to do - or is reframing not enough and is transformation - reflection on the context - needed?

Example of transforming: Apple: computers -> phones -> patent (IP issues in ARD)�Apple makes the most of its revenues on patents!

What to do tomorrow when you are late for work?

Have an excuse / get up earlier /
Rethink how to avoid traffic jam / change transportation means (carpool)
Search work closer to home / with better commuting or move house / change work or work from home / connect

What to do when a crop yield diminishes?

Breeding new varieties / include genes to resist
Change crop cycles
Change crop / combine crop and livestock

When reacting starts to loop / look like firefighting its time to rethink the frame / framing.

When the framing gets detached from reality change / transform the frame

How to improve knowledge sharing

Stimulate staff to share knowledge
Organise organizational KM
Think about learning at sector level

Reacting (re-acting) can be continuously improved and / or protocols refined.

In the end re-framing / transforming ‘falls back’ to single loop learning.

Re-framing / transforming needs deliberately planning review.

Advanced: use this model for your organization: context = context, frame = narrative mission vision etc, actions == what you do an outcomes == outcomes.

The model envisions in a simple way:

an organization / network started traditionally with context, through frames and actions to outcomes
reacting is about ‘doing things right’; ask yourself if that is where you are
reframing is about reflecting on ‘doing the right things’ - nicely put between the context and action ....
that a context shift might need transforming.

34 of 73

Cheat sheet introduction to KM

	1st generation	2nd generation	3rd generation
WORDL	information	knowledge	context
WORDL	explicit	tacit	learning?
KM4Dev	stock	flow	context
Dixon	explicit	experiential	collective
Dixon	collection	connection	conversation
Dixon	learning in private		learning in public
Dixon	need to know		transparency
Dixon	management control content		user control content
PPT model	technology	people	process
Dixon	information management	experience management	idea management
Dixon	internet	www	web 2.0
Dixon: Connect	people to info	people to people	integrating ideas
Anklam	explicit	tacit	emergent
Anklam: Knowledge lives	artifacts	individuals	networks
Anklam	infrastructures	behavior	conditions
Learning loop	action	frame	context
iSpace: dimensions	abstract	narrative	experiential
Pels	Agenda	Audience	Arena

To be learned: work with the overview and see how alle wording group over generations.....

Point to make: overview KM vocabulary; see the (successive) development.

Use: think about where you are as organization or as KM initiative; which words describe best what you do / want.

Look at the whole column where you have the most ‘hits’ and pinpoint the KM generation you need to nurture.

It also works the other way around: you are dealing with networks?

Than 3rd generation, think in knowledge flow (row KM4Dev), emphasis is on the process (row PPT model) etc.

PS Do not be ashamed to be in the 1st generation; just address IM as fundament to go to the next generation.

PS There is (hardly) leapfrogging generations.

PS Even when in the 3rd generation, issues from 1st and 2nd need attention!!!

PS Notice 3rd generation KM to happen in networks and control content by users (empowered).

35 of 73

Introduction to KM

Part 2: focus on KM tree

36 of 73

KM Tree

37 of 73

Weggeman basics | KM Tree-model

To be learned: same ideas different models...

.... has been combined with the McKinsey 7S model - Culture through Systems.

To the left you see the CTA Tree model.

The leaves are build on the KVC, on KM and the stem / roots on the organizational design variables the management has to steer for results.

KVC = Knowledge Value Chain Weggeman

Systems Basics; manage effectiveness & efficiency
Structure Mechanism to share
Personnel Biggest asset in respect to knowledge
Style (management style also) Hard work!!!
Culture Learning / open
Strategy Plan for action

This is 5% inspiration and 95% transpiration

This is a thorough - almost scientific - approach. For all the cells of the Weggeman table examples - lessons learned / good practices - of KM interventions are available.

Example questions: ‘What is your strategy to establish what knowledge is needed?’, ‘Which culture is needed for knowledge sharing?’ and ‘What management style is conducive for knowledge development?’. The later issue is on the plates of senior staff and management. The answers might be respective scenario-planning for strategy, incentives like recognition for lunch meeting KS and ‘a people oriënted management style’.

Other questions are ‘Is staff with available knowledge in house or do we want to partner?’, ‘What structure do we need for evaluation?’, and ‘Do we have a system to support knowledge available?’. Here answers might be partnering, an evaluation event and use of LinkedIn as system.

As you see the model is thorough, almost too all encompassing. Chose wisely is the motto here.

There is a scan for the Weggeman model AND one attuned to the CTA Tree model available if you want to measure and validate sentiments. The CTA Tree model and more on knowledge management for ARD has been described in short leaflets by Co-capacity in consultancy for CTA.

If you go for a scan - organization wide - you will need a baseline study - measurement one - and from there focus on improvement of the practice. Remember the lessons from the pioneers “Build on core competences”, so, what are you good at, what is your role in the sector? The first lessons btw is ‘Enthusiastic Champions.... ‘ and that is you.

38 of 73

38

Nurture the KM Tree(s)

Knowledge Management ‘trees’ are used as a metaphor for knowledge management within individuals, organizations and networks / communities alike, collectively constituting Knowledge ecosystems
Knowledge management trees are nurtured to develop optimal knowledge intensive environments so that sustainable value can be created for their partners, clients and members.
So optimally equipping these organizations, networks and knowledge workers (the trees), is the main focus of “integral knowledge management”

39 of 73

Operate within environment

Analysis of competition, economical context, natural factors, political factors.

…

Consultations, partner organizations, (back) donors, clients

…

External expert input, facilitation,

…

40 of 73

Training, capacity building, publication of resources, web portals,

...

Country assessments, evaluation of training,

...

Training and follow up, network support, webinars,

...

Create value

41 of 73

Exercise K environment & value

Analyse own situation in respect to knowledge value and environment.

are processes understandable?
any programs installed?
other?

Anybody ‘looking out the window’?

42 of 73

Build strong foundations

Culture scan

Implement culture interventions

…

Structure scan

project-organization

(Belbin) team roles, governance roles / responsibilities

…

Developing situational leadership

Optimising management roles

…

Competence management

knowledge retention practices

master-apprentice

develop subject matter experts

…

Strategy development

vision - mission - ambition

SMART objectives

action planning

…

43 of 73

Exercise foundation

Analyse own situation in respect to foundations.

are categories understandable?
any of the mentioned programs installed?
other?

44 of 73

Develop knowledge processes

45 of 73

Knowledge creation

Research, desk studies, pilots, hiring of external experts,

...

Develop knowledge tree, knowledge matrix, do mapping exercises,

...

Strategy development, scenario planning, M&E of external services,

...

46 of 73

Exercise K creation processes

Analyse own situation in respect to K processes.

are processes understandable?
any programs installed?
other?

47 of 73

Storage of knowledge

Data and content curation,

..

Master apprentice, retention schemes

...

Stewardship, subject matter specialists, databases,

...

48 of 73

Exercise K storage processes

Analyse own situation in respect to K processes.

are processes understandable?
any programs installed?
other?

49 of 73

Use of knowledge

Best practices, lessons learned, balance sheets, audits,

...

Training development, capacity development, publicizing,

web-portal development,

content management,

...

Web portals, lunch sessions, master-apprentice, CoP, learning communities, web 2.0, internal training and coaching,

...

50 of 73

Exercise K use processes

Analyse own situation in respect to K processes.

are processes understandable?
any programs installed?
other?

51 of 73

Optimise the enablers

Web-portals, exert system

web 2.0, databases

ERP / DMS and other software

…

Internal communication strategy

Brown bag lunches, meetings, intranet

…

Internal think tank, idea box, ..

…

After action review, evaluations, peer assist,

…

52 of 73

Exercise enablers

Analyse own situation in respect to enablers.

are processes understandable?
any programs installed?
other?

53 of 73

Situation analysis: KM scan

Next slides :

Pels individual scan
Pels suggested KM interventions
IRC organizational scan
IEA suggested KM interventions

54 of 73

KM scan example

55 of 73

56 of 73

KM Scan

57 of 73

KM function IEA (Morocco)

To be learned: look at tools / methods / techniques using Weggeman

PS This is workshop result from IEA Morocco (Water company) where participants discussed on what interventions to use in the column / row combinations.

PS Sometimes knowledge needed, available and develop are taken as one column. Alos share and apply can be taken together.

Key brainstorm question is ‘What to do to address the cells; combination of the Knowledge Value Chain and the 7Sses?’

Example:

What to do about Personnel when dealing with knowledge use (Apply / Evaluate)
What about Systems when dealing with knowledge development (K needed, available and develop).
What to do about Strategy when dealing with knowledge sharing (curation, retention, availability)

PS Model Weggeman has been refined in the CTA KM tree.

58 of 73

Exercise KM scan

Have a look at the KM scan as developed for the KM tree model and think about how to introduce it in your organization / network.
Think about one branch plus one root plus one enabler of the KM tree and address issues in your organization / network and try to come up with a mini KM plan

59 of 73

Introduction to KM

Part 3: Other KM models

60 of 73

KM cyclic framework ....

To be learned: see points below

Point to make: easy model; KM splits into KS (top boxes) and IM (bottom box)

Go through the next slides with a bit of pace.... They are examples.

Example PhD; also PKM / SSS => retour academic community

This model views KM from another perspective. It assumes people having conversations / deploy activities in networks; the top yellow blocks.

Notice that there are multiple conversations and activities parallel running. Sometimes bringing two conversations together is pure KM.

The smallest network is a network of two people, but even for one person the framework sheds light on what to do.

This KM model focuses only on your primary process - later more on primary processes, but the core of your business big, small or in networks is your ‘raison d’être’ and entails the primary process. The primary process is why your network / organization is on earth.

The trick is to organise a process for these conversations / activities where people learn, research and exchange / share knowledge.

Most prominent are organizations here; research organization; farmer organizations, village level learning alliances, CTA, the African Union etc.

Networks like KM4Dev, SALGA, SuSanA, the (West) Africa rice network etc fall in the same category.

To the model an organization is a constraint network.

One way or another the conversations, the activities, the process has to generate information. The development industry is called an information industry and recently a knowledge industry. Indeed, in development information and knowledgable people are crucial. The latter are scarce and the first has a low signal / noise ratio. There is so much information on almost any topic one easily drowns and on the other hand the development community is starving for reliable data. Next to RCTs development is swamped with measurements for research, for reporting, for monitoring, for evaluation, for ..... Whatever the case the process needs some form of documentation to result in information.

The management of information is of course done with IT and communication / dissemination (back) to network(s) of people. Nowadays we loop so fast in this framework we do not even notice it. I can twitter a tweet with a hashtag now and within seconds it shows up in TweetedTimes. See for yourself at http: / / tweetedtimes.com / #! / KMforDEV.

Beyond the details: when you assemble a KM intervention you need to address all boxes and arrows. For more explanation see https: / / docs.google.com / document / d / 1IEpFKXnW9Z8Acuw9Nx4VtoPsqSxTrWYb6nPVlCeL0Yc / edit?usp=sharing

Address all blocks for info flow; focus on top block for KS

conversations / activities (knowledge sharing)
(process) documentation / capitalisation
information management
dissemination / communication

61 of 73

Defining knowledge and learning

Knowledge is information that individuals have reflected on, understood, internalized and are able to use.

Learning is a developmental process that integrates thinking and doing. It provides a link between the past and the future, requiring us to look for meaning in our actions and giving purpose to our thoughts.

Source: Bruce Britton (2005)

62 of 73

Management meeting

Meeting

Minutes

63 of 73

Newsletter

?

Editorial formula

?

Newsletter

64 of 73

CLTS KM in Ghana

Learning alliance

Participatory video

CTLS portal

RSS feed

Validate

65 of 73

CoP or Research

F2F learning /

Research

Archive /

Library

66 of 73

Buzz Iceberg

To be learned: show examples iceberg and buzz about it

Point to make: lots of KM happens under the surface ...

It is easy to get lost: KM world: Knowledge management can be a bit of an elusive term. We have always maintained—especially now in 2015—that knowledge management is the umbrella under which all other technical disciplines fall, including (but not limited to) business intelligence, collaboration, competitive intelligence, content management, customer / experience relationship management, enterprise search and discovery, big data management, business process management, adaptive case management, imaging, workflow, document management, cognitive computing and so on. And, as we’ve done in the past, we have recognized a number of consultancies and research firms for their contributions to the broader view of knowledge management. From http: / / www.kmworld.com / Articles / Editorial / Features / KMWorld-100-COMPANIES-That-Matter-in-Knowledge-Management-102189.aspx

=====

LeBorgne Mind your culture, and mind that I don’t mind it ;) Posted on March 8, 2015

‘Culture’ is one of the very complex, variables to face in any knowledge management initiative. It is also one of the difficult variables in Mathieu Weggeman’s ‘knowledge value chain‘. With good reason, considering what it really is. Everything that is closely related to change is difficult, and complex.

The excellent infographic below relates to organizational change and unravels some of that complexity surrounding the evanescent concept of ‘culture’.

The iceberg of organizational change – where culture and other subtle drivers are *really* deciding the name of the game (Credits: Torbenrick)

Personally I pay a lot of attention to culture, and yet I’m never really sure what to make of it. So here are a couple of thoughts about culture in a KM context.

Yes culture exists, and can be a really important enabler or barrier to any KM initiative;
So yes, paying attention to it is not only good, it’s essential. It can become a way to harness change around local preferences (e.g. asking people what they consider appropriate or not for their culture);
But culture is not necessarily what people think it is, and the scale of culture changes a lot (across industries, ages, even places large or small) – so best gather a variety of viewpoints about it from e.g. high-placed people, women, youths, people of diverse ethnic and / or socio-economic backgrounds etc.;
Because culture is often much less (if at all !) something codified than e.g. strategies, procedures etc.
But culture should not become a shield behind which no change is possible. Change happens everywhere, all the time, which means no culture is carved in stone, only the levers and buttons to trigger change may work very differently in places where the people have not been exposed to a lot of diverse experiences ;
Realising for yourself what you put as your own cultural background vis-à-vis other people or groups is also really helpful to keep your own biases in check, and engage in more meaningful intercultural learning conversations ;
Culture is a good conversation trigger to loosen tongues and get people to reflect on the deeper trends that affect their lives, beyond what is formally written, or said ;
Using the card of your own culture in a completely different environment can also be a powerful way to trigger change by playing a neutral role – or the role of the not culturally-savvy person who can come up with provoking statements…

Culture, it keeps moving on (Credits: Scott Beale / Laughing Squid)

So in brief, culture can be a useful trigger to spawn deep conversations, and is not something any KM initiative should take lightly, but it should also not be considered a factor to wave as an excuse for change – or at least good, serious, deep conversations – not to happen.

So even more briefly : mind your culture, and mind that I don’t mind it… so much…

67 of 73

APCQ KM framework

To be learned: show examples KM framework and buzz about it

Point to make: Lots of commercial companies developed a method to introduce KM in organizations. This is a much used one for bigger development organizations.

Point to make: You can use elements and learn from th logical flow of activities.

Once you complete the Call to Action phase, you will have a clearly articulated value proposition linking KM to your organization’s knowledge needs and strategic goals. This value proposition, along with the critical knowledge areas you have prioritized, will guide the overall focus and direction of your KM program. The value proposition is also a tool to communicate the potential benefits of KM and help leaders understand how better knowledge flow can affect business results.

At the conclusion of the Develop KM Strategy phase, you will have a detailed strategy based on your current status, what you would like to achieve in terms of knowledge flow, which areas you plan to tackle first, and where specific priorities fall on the timeline. Your governance framework, prioritization, implementation plan, business case, and budget will come together to provide a detailed road map for KM implementation.

After the Design and Implement KM Capabilities phase, your KM program will be up and running: You will have a set of KM approaches supported by a clear resource model, enabling technology, and measures to evaluate success. While you will have detailed plans and budgets to guide you forward, these must be dynamic to accommodate cycles of continuous improvement as well as changes affecting the organization and the market.

The result of the Evolve and Sustain phase is an effective KM program that is adaptable and sustainable over the long term. KM will be embedded in your processes and operations, and employees will recognize the role that knowledge sharing and collaboration play in individual and organizational performance. Fully integrated into the flow of work, KM activities will support innovation and drive competitive advantage. Source: http: / / www.apqc.org / km-framework

Very nice wording; now practice :-)

Notice scan at http: / / www.apqc.org / km-capability-assessment-tool, but first become member for access.

Down below free mini-trial capacity assessment tool access. Questions below disappoint a bit .... too obvious / ambiguous.

Is your organization doing anything it calls knowledge management?

Is there a general consensus in your organization about what knowledge management means?

Is your organization doing something that, although not called knowledge management, falls under the definition of knowledge management?

Has a business need for knowledge management been identified?

Does senior management understand and support knowledge management as a key to your organization’s business strategy?

Are people specifically assigned to knowledge management activities?

Does your organization as a whole know what knowledge it already has?

Do the people who need information know who has it and how to find it?

Is knowledge systematically transferred from one part of your organization to another?

Is knowledge consistently gathered from outside your organization for internal use?

Is technology used effectively to share knowledge within your organization?

Are people networks accustomed to effectively sharing knowledge within your organization?

Does the culture of your organization encourage people to share their knowledge and reward them for doing so?

Is your organization taking full advantage of its knowledge to improve its products and services?

Does your organization measure the impact or success of its knowledge management efforts?

68 of 73

Social learning - a framework

Wenger-Trayner

Subscribe2

Add to

Share

More

128 views

30

Published on 23 Feb 2015

Planning, implementing and evaluating social learning projects

Category

Education

Licence

Standard YouTube Licence

To be learned: a framework for social learning

Point to make: Some companies / consultancies focus KM initiatives as social learning; Wenger / Trayner have a name in the KM sector; Wengers’ reputation stems from his work on communities of practice. Fun video to watch.

Learning as driver for value, various forms of value:

Immediate
Potential
Applied
Realized

together in a chain leading to

Transformative
underlying
Strategic
and
Enabling

value.

This is dissected in ‘Aspirations’ and ‘Conditions’ for project planning.

See min 10:22 for application to running a project generating support for attribution to project goals.

Also evaluation can benefit from this framework (see min 10:28).

Pretty savvy!

If a group can agree on using this model it will be useful.

69 of 73

Kolb

70 of 73

Nonaka

SECI

To be learned: show SECI example on knowledge by Nonaka et al.�i = individual

g = group

o = organization

Points to make: a famous model for KM work.

Source: http: / / www.tlu.ee / ~sirvir / IKM / Theoretical_models_of_Information_and_Knowledge_Management / the_SECI_model.html

Two leading Japanese business experts, Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi, were the first to tie the success of Japanese companies to their ability to create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies.

The Nonaka and Takeuchi model of KM has its roots in a holistic model of knowledge creation and the management of 'serendipity'. The tacit / explicit spectrum of knowledge forms (the epistemological dimension) and the individual / group / organizational or three-tier model of knowledge sharing and diffusion (the ontological dimension) are both needed to create knowledge and produce innovation (Dalkir, 2011, p.64).

The authors point out that there are two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge, contained in manuals and procedures, and tacit knowledge, learned only by experience, and communicated only indirectly, through metaphor and analogy. U.S. managers focus on explicit knowledge. The Japanese, on the other hand, focus on tacit knowledge. And this, the authors argue, is the key to their success - the Japanese have learned how to transform tacit into explicit knowledge.

They argue that Western culture considers knower and known as separate entities. In contrast, the structural characteristics of the Japanese language and influences such as Zen Buddhism led the Japanese to consider that there is a oneness of humanity and nature, body and mind, and self and the other (Nonaka and takeuchi, 2005 as cited in Dalkir, 2011, p.65).

In The Knowledge-Creating Company (1995), Nonaka & Takeuchi provide an inside look at how Japanese companies go about creating this new knowledge organizationally.

To explain how this is done, the authors range from Greek philosophy to Zen Buddhism, from classical economists to modern management gurus, illustrating the theory of organizational knowledge creation with case studies drawn from such firms as Honda, Canon, Matsushita, NEC, Nissan, 3M, GE, and the U.S. Marines.

For instance, using Matsushita's development of the Home Bakery, they show how tacit knowledge can be converted to explicit knowledge: when the designers couldn't perfect the dough kneading mechanism, a software programmer apprenticed herself with the master baker at Osaka International Hotel, gained a tacit understanding of kneading, and then conveyed this information to the engineers.

In addition, the authors show that, to create knowledge, the best management style is neither top-down nor bottom-up, but rather what they call "middle-up-down," in which the middle managers form a bridge between the ideals of top management and the chaotic realities of the frontline.

Nonaka and Takeuchi are arguing that creating knowledge will become the key to sustaining a competitive advantage in the future. Because the competitive environment and customer preferences changes constantly, knowledge perishes quickly. With The Knowledge-Creating Company, managers have at their fingertips years of insight from Japanese firms that reveal how to create knowledge continuously, and how to exploit it to make successful new products, services, and systems [http: / / books.google.ee / books?id=B-qxrPaU1-MC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false].

71 of 73

Boisot

To be learned: show influence of IT on hierarchies

Points to make: influence of IT on organizations: pressure towards networks! / complexity

Source: http: / / www.internationalfuturesforum.com / iffblog_old / wp-content / uploads / 2011 / 09 / iff-atlas-boisot-presentation-july2010.pdf

Max Boisot analysed organizations in terms of information diffusion and codification. He coined the iSpace model. Whether that is a workable set of dimensions to think about and plan KM interventions and / or social learning is left to the reader, but exactly these two dimensions are ‘under pressure’ by information (& communication) technology (IT). IT pushes towards the favourite combinations of codified and diffused both high, or both low. IT pushes towards ‘free agent networks’ (highly codified and diffused information) in the space labelled ‘complexity’. In other words, a non-hierarchical network is the preferred structure in complex areas. Staff has to deal with organizations (hierarchical, constraint networks) and looser networks and KM in these two shapes differently in methods, tools and planning.

72 of 73

IMA

73 of 73

Over lunch day 1

Discuss about all

the networks you have

(use) on Internet like G+

and LinkedIn.