Adventures in Knowledge

Facilitating Knowledge Transfer and Retention in the Modern Workplace

I have just returned from making two presentations and participating in the Ark Group conference - "Facilitating Knowledge Transfer and Retention in the Modern Workplace". I made two presentations that are available on Slideshare:

Shift happens: how to share knowledge in a network centric world

Knowledge transitions: using narrative to understand the issues of attracting and retaining volunteers

This certainly was an enjoyable conference with active discussion and participation from attendees. What was encouraging was the discussion being based around people and connection. It seems that as knowledge professionals we have an important role to play in talent attraction and retention - in fact the alignment between HR and knowledge sharing is becoming even more important and valuable to the business. It was encouraging to see communities and collaboration being a key theme of the conference.

Profound Knowledge in an Networked World

I just came a cross a posting in Value Networks by Jay Deragon titled "Profound Knowledge in a Networked World" His opening paragraph:

"The Relationship Economy will require transformation of knowledge, management, media, technology and individual participation.The prevailing cultures that are driving all business must undergo transformation.  The "system" of relationship networks can not understand itself. The transformation to the Relationship Economy requires a view from outside."

certainly has struck a chord with me, as this is the fundamental idea that I have been putting foward in our move to a networked world. Jay goes onto talk about the transformation of the individual as part of a "profound knowledge of the networked world". When reading how he sees an individual being transformed, it certainly mirrored a lot of my experience in changing the way I looked at knowledge in a networked world. Also, in talking about the relationship economy, once again People are at the centre - not technology.

On another note, I will be taking a "short break" from blogging for the next two weeks as I venture to New Zealand for some skiing - hopefully the gods will be kind and bring some healthy snow showers in the coming week!

Shifts Happen - How Knowledge is Created in the Information Era (repost - links fixed)

Here is a link to a blog entry on my presentation at KM Australia, posted by Ralph Kerle at the Creative Leadership Forum titled Shifts Happen - How Knowledge is created in the Information Era.

Thanks for the feedback Ralph!

Coming to the Edge: The future of knowledge in a network centric world (part 2)

This is a continuation of Part 1 (Warning - LONG post).

So what has all of this got to do with knowledge? Well we are seeing a change in perspective around knowledge from one of a content centric focus on Intellectual Capital, to one where social capital will be the currency. It will be about who we know and what we will do for each other. In essence, we are seeing shift to people being central to how knowledge moves through the organisation.

To define social capital, I refer to a recent thought leadership publication by Deloitte called Its 2008: Do you know where your Talent is? Connecting People to What Matters Here the author Robin Athey provides a very apt definition of social capital. In my mind it has some clear reference points:

- value people produce when working together
- people building trust
- a shared understanding
- willingness to co-operate
- producing something greater than the sum of their parts

To me this personifies what we should strive for in the sharing of knowledge. However, one cannot underestimate what this means for an organisation - implicit in social capital is the culture which is willing to work in this way, or the the change programme required to shift an organisation's way of thinking.

When I started to think about what this shift in knowledge away from a content based approach to a strong focus on people driving knowledge sharing, I put together a framework to help me make sense of where this is going.

Framework built on two axis:

•- Type of Knowledge: Explicit to Tacit (Vertical Axis)

•- Ways of working: Transaction based to Relationship based (Horizontal axis)

This framework can be divided into four quadrants, with each quadrant describing a categorisation based upon the relationship between knowledge type and the ways people would create/use that knowledge. There is no right or wrong as to where specific groups are located on the matrix, but it does allow one to see the current positioning of organisations today, and where they directionally would like to get to. By understanding where the focus is today, one is able to define how much effort and an approach to move up the value curve and change quadrants.

Four quadrants:

- Explicit knowledge and process based work = commoditisation – dealing with information and relatively low value in return to the business

- Explicit knowledge and relationship based = standardisation – still dealing with information, but packaging it in ways that have value to staff

These quadrants are knowledge foundations and are the space where a significant number of portal systems operate in. The cost of operating in these quadrants is relatively high and the value to the business incremental in return

- Tacit knowledge and process based = collaboration – dealing with experience and insight not codified and often not shared in a portal setting, however a structured approach to conversation and connection exists i.e. discussion boards, eRooms, Wikis etc

- Tacit knowledge and relationship based = innovation – connecting people and developing a network approach to business where conversation and communities are the norm. Social networks are leveraged to connect and collaborate in real time

To differentiate the business and have competitive advantage, it is important to look at how the organisation can move up the value curve to collaborate & innovate in knowledge. This is the space which will have increasing importance due changing business dynamics with exposure to Enterprise 2.0

Above all, collaboration and innovation are about knowledge developed by providing a true context to information through connecting people and building networks. Our challenge is to define the roadmap for our organisations that will get us up the value curve in ways which work within the boundaries of our corporate cultures or encompass strategies to shift the culture.

So in effect, there is a shift in focus from:

Content & Collection: The acquisition, organisation and aggregation, storage and dissemination of content under organisation wide taxonomies using cutomised tools and repositories, just in case it might be reuseable

to:
Context & Connection:  Connecting the right people just in-time, canvassing them to gain their knowledge and advice in the context of a specific business problem or pursuit, synthesizing that knowledge and applying it to the issues at hand

We are seeing the use of new Web 2.0 tools facilitating some of this move. Individuals and organisations are now starting to use wikis as a way of collaborating, using blogs as a way of sharing their views on specific topics - passionately! by extensive use of linking, people are connecting to others who share their interests and passion - both inside and outside of the organisation. Social networks applications are being considered by companies as a way of getting staff to develop and build their networks within the organisation.

Once again the biggest challenge is for companies to acknowledge and embrace these changes. If they don't, human nature is to seek out opportunities to connect - if this is not facilitated internally, people will go outside of the organisation to do so. In Facebook for example, there is the ability for anyone to setup their own group - I would not hesitate to wager that there are a lot of groups in place dealing with company issues that should be behind the firewall, but are being dealt with in this social network setting as these types of networks are not being facilitated internally. When I tell partners' in Deloitte where I work that there is a Facebook community of over 13,000 practitioners, they are stunned.

In a nutshell, connection is about people - both virtually and face to face. The role of knowledge becomes one of facilitation, to find the opportunities for people to connect - to seek out the "watercoolers" around which people can connect and hold conversations. Collaboration in a networked world is not one of forcing people into artificially contructed communities or work groups but seeding connections that allow people to gather around an issue or idea that is going to benefit them in getting their job done.

From my experience, getting leadership to see the business from the perspective of a network is challenging, as it does challenge the concept of command and control so well entrenched in business today. However, when they do see their business from the view of a network the mindset shifts and the need / want to support collaboration becomes that much stronger. There are tools that can be used to assist this process such as Organisational Network Analysis.

A case in point is a recent ONA I conducted for a business in China. They were moving into a growth phase and wanted to ensure that the business was structured in a way to cater for accelerated growth. To cut a long story short, the network analysis revealed structural problems in the business between offices, divisions and levels of staff that would act as an inhibitor to growth. The leadership said that they had a gut feel that these issues existed , but now that they were in "black and white", they had to acknowledge them and do something to change. In fact, the network analysis was a catalyst to reevaluate their strategy, and bulding a framework around collaboration has become one of the primary planks of their strategy moving forward.

So, I titled this presentation coming to the edge - not with the belief that we are going to fall over it, but rather on the basis that we are on a journey of change. These are exciting times to be involved in knowledge, but also the most challenging! The complexity of our world and the businesses within which we work are only going to increase and the problems thrown up only going to become more intractible. No longer can we view the world as a linear construct where A will lead to B etc. We need to understand that we are operating within a complex system or network if you like, that is in constant motion. We can only attempt to make sense of this today and probe, sense and respond to influence direction rather than ultimate outcomes. It is incumbent upon us to ensure our organisations "get it" so as not to become the dinosaurs of the 21st Century.

In wrapping up, I would like to leave you with the following quote which I believe sums upon knowledge in a networked world.

Coming to the Edge: The future of knowledge in a network centric world

I am presenting at KM Australia in three weeks time, and am in the process of putting my presentation together. I thought that over several posts, I would share my thinking and if anyone wants to provide feedback - Awesome! Just a warning - this is a LONG post!!

I have named my presentation "Coming to the Edge: A practitioners perspective on the future of knowledge in a network centric world"

Why coming to the edge? Because as I have posted previously, I believe that there are fundamental changes happening today in the way we interact that are flying below the radar, but will in the coming years manifest themselves in fundamental changes to the way we do business. These changes are all occuring at once - business, communications, culture, demography, economics, education etc and are leading to a networked world, where business sustainability will be based upon different fundamentals than exist today, and you guessed it - knowledge has a key role to play!

Did you Know?

In order to get people thinking outside the square, I will play a clip called "Did you know?" by Karl Fisch which will set the scene for fundamental change. On the back of this I will lead into explaining this change and how knowledge has a role to play.

The World is Flat

The first perspective is the global shift that has happened as per what Thomas Friedman in the World is Flat  - A Short History of the 21st Century terms Globalisation 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. The key to this is that we are in the era of People being empowered and competitive - not organisations 

Drivers of a Networked World

 

We are living in a time when the basic forces of human endeavour – business, communications, culture, demography, economics, education, law, politics, science, technology and others, are all recalibrating at once, shaping a different world before our eyes. It doesn‘t look that different yet, but give it a few more years and we won‘t recognise it.

We also must look at the networked world as a sustainable system – business is evolutionary and dynamic. Examining the notion of sustainablilty in business requires new ways of thinking about systems and communities. Improving sustainability in business must take into account the interconnections and interdependencies of the economic, social, environmental, and technology systems that exist today.  Sustainability in a networked world is not about maintaining the status quo or pushing specific agendas. It is a process of understanding change, influencing its direction and knowing when and how to respond. Being sustainable in business is about being prepared for the future and how to work within networks.

There are four main drivers of this change to a networked world, namely Web 2.0, the rise of the participation culture, changing economic models and shifts in society back towards community.

Evolving: Web 2.0

This slide will show the range of Web 2.0 tools that are now in the marketplace. These tools are able to facilitate conversation and connection. The key point is that they are facilitators of connection, and are not huge, structured technology implementations. The individual provides the context for their use and drive connecting and development of networks.

The key issue to be aware of with these tools, is that a large number of senior management have no understanding of what they are, their use and potential impact upon the business. There is a need for  education and awareness raising required to ensure that they can see the opportunity cost of not embracing these tools today. Indeed in my business this has been the case - often if there is awareness of these tools, the view has been that these are for kids and not relevant to the business. I have shown, that our people are actively using these tools - in Facebook, Deloitte has an active community of over 10,000 people - the same holds true of My Space. The challenge I have put forward, is do we embrace community building behind the firewall and stengthed networks and connections, or play a game of ostrich which can only lead to dilution of the value our people can provide clients.

The rise of the participation culture

The current generation of people coming into the workforce today – the net generation, are the first that do not remember a time when there was not an internet, or the ability to participate in online communities.

This generation is fundamentally different to Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y. This is the user generated content generation – or Gen C.

Some of the characteristics of Gen C are that they are very self centred – looking after themselves is a high priority. Most will on average stay with one employer for two years. They do not like working in a hierarchical environment, preferring a flat structure and a team based approach to management. This generation intuitively know how to network – they actively do this outside of work, spending more time surfing the net, interacting and building community through social network sites, sharing MP3’s through peer sharing, involving themselves in multiplayer online games whilst reading a magazine. This generation know what they want, and will use their network to get it.

The Net Generation are putting pressure on companies to change behaviours in the workplace - they are demanding answers to questions such as Corporate Social Responsibility, Plans for reducing carbon footprints, Policy on extended leave to travel, Work-Life balance to name but a few. With the war for talent in full swing, it is encumbent on organisations to listen to these wants and adapt or risk losing out on access to the top end of the talent pool. The impact this generation will have was recently brought home to me

The Economics of Change

With the advent of Web 2.0 and the rise of the participation culture, we are also seeing a shift in the business models that are beginning to permeat the marketplace. Companies which have understood that hierachy, silos and command and control strucutres are deficits to adding value have endeavoured to become transparent both to staff and clients, reaching outside of traditional walls to harness external knowledge, resources and capabilities. They are looking at ways of peering with other companies where there is a mutual benefit, engaging in conversation with their customers to co-develop products, the community to tap into ideas that lead to new and innovative solutions and acting globally.

Some examples

Proctor & Gamble - Innocentive

P&G realised that whilst it had 9,000 really great scientists, the speed to discover new formulations and molecules would not be sufficient maintain a lead in innnovation and demands for growth. Relying on internal resources would not be enough. P&G estimated that for everyone of their scientists in house, there would be approximately another 200 outside who were just as good. That meant that there could be a pool of over 1.8 million scientists who might be able to meet some of their R&D needs. To this end, P&G have tapped into Innocentive where cash rewards are offered to scientists who come up with solutions for some of their R&D needs. This has meant that P&G are able to stay ahead in innovation, be faster to market and engage a significantly larger pool of talent. Internally, R&D is no longer used as the terminology - instead C&D (Connect and Develop) is used.

Goldcorp Challenge

Goldcorp are a Toronto based gold mining company that was about to collapse under debt and inefficiencies of production. They were being unable to locate gold veins within their holdings. The CEO Rob McEwen decided that he needed to do soemthin differently as his geologists were unable to locate the gold veins. What he did was to publish all his data on the geology of his property on the web, with a challenge to people to come up with gold estimates, location and methods of extraction. On offer was a prize pool of $575,000. The challenge was a great success, with over 1,000 submissions from over 50 countries. The result was the locating of over $2billion worth of gold and a stratospheric rise in the share price - not a bad return on a $575,000 investment

The Long Tail

The theory of the Long Tail is that our culture and economy is increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of "hits" (mainstream products and markets) at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail. As the costs of production and distribution fall, especially online, there is now less need to lump products and consumers into one-size-fits-all containers. In an era without the constraints of physical shelf space and other bottlenecks of distribution, narrowly-target goods and services can be as economically attractive as mainstream fare.

One example of this is the theory's prediction that demand for products not available in traditional bricks and mortar stores is potentially as big as for those that are. But the same is true for video not available on broadcast TV on any given day, and songs not played on radio. In other words, the potential aggregate size of the many small markets in goods that don't individually sell well enough for traditional retail and broadcast distribution may rival that of the existing large market in goods that do cross that economic bar.

Social Change

Whilst the evidence is anecdotal, we are seeing the pendulum shift back to an awareness of the importance of community and the impact of community based networks in influencing government, impact on the environment and social reform for those less privileged.

For example:

Increased awareness of climate change - we have seen in Australia the impact of drought and water shortage influencing community behaviours and approaches to environmental conservation. This has increasingly entered the political arena with the upcoming federal election in Australia and both the Liberal and Labour parties vying for the popular vote with policy on climate change.

Media focus on social issues such as the impact of workplace reform legistlation on family and community. The focus of media generated debate on social issues through programmes such as "Insight". The increase in debate on whether tax relief is more important than education, health and community projects such as indigenous health.

There are a growing number of community, not for profit groups endeavouring to catalyse individuals to lead social change initiatives such as Social Ventures Australia, Project Australia, GlobalMindShift to name but a few.

We are seeing corporate Australia begin to view corporate social responsibility as a strategy - not a cost. Moreover, CSR is not being seen as something to throw dollars at, but a way to involve their workforce in participating in the community

In essence, these are all indicators of the desire of people to renew/develop connections,start conversations and build community networks

These four drivers are fundamentally driving the shift towards a networked world. This is not talking about a world lead by technology, but by people connecting and collaborating to achieve their needs. It is about people finding the water coolers to interact, develop context and feel empowered to solve problems.

so I know that you are now asking, what does this have to do with knowledge.....

End of part one

The missing link?

Further to my post yesterday on collaboration, I have been working with some colleagues on developing a strategy for a network centric business. Part of this will require technology that allows not only the sharing of content, but enabling people to build networks. It is interesting to note that a lot of vendors are still in the content space and really do not understand where knowledge is going. As case in point - what is wrong with this picture:

What struck me was the central focus on a "knowledge bank" implying this is where we "stuff" lots of content and call it knowledge! Where is the ability to provide a context to what is for all intents and purpose information. Where is the ability for members to engage in conversation, to share views and collaborate? It does seem that we still are seeing a very "old world" view of knowledge that does not really cater for people and connection. If we rely on vendors with this view, unfortunately we will reinforce older models, the significant investments made to purchase, develop and maintain them and of course the political interest that ensues to protect and justify decisions made. What further reinforces that they have not "got it" is the willingness to bolt on as an afterthought tools such as blogs, wikis, RSS, collaboration spaces to name a few without a context for their use.

Of course this is a generalisation - and I am sure there are vendors out there that do understand knowledge and Web 2.0 - but from my observations they are not front and centre for mainstream business.

Collaboration

In the last week I have been seeing, hearing and discussing a lot about collaboration. In my organisation we are currently looking at what collaboration means in a global organisation. The interesting thing is that our preconceptions and experiences are very strong influencers on what we think collaboration is. Indeed those who have been exposed to Lotus notes, Documentum eRoom, Discussion boards and the like, from my observations have a very set view that these are the key to any definition of collaboration and what it must be in the future of the organisation. So, a database view of the world tends to dominate. However, when you start to introduce "people" into the equation and the idea of connection, then the dynamic starts to change. The questions about collaboration no longer revolve around the "best" technology solution, but how to get people to connect. When you frame this as "how will our people collaboration in five years" the questions and discussion changes remarkably.

Two paragraphs in the recent paper Winning with Enterprise 2.0 by Don Tapscott stood out and really got me thinking about this:

"Collaboration is the new foundation of competitiveness. Normally the term collaboration conjures up images of office workers interacting effectively together. True, knowledge is the ability to take effective action. The exchange of knowledge amongst people allows them to communicate complex ideas and to collaborate in creating value.

But the concept is changing. By "collaboration" we mean the increasing richness of means by which objects (things, people and firms) can work together enhanced by the medium of the internet. We have described this as the fundamental transition of the internet from being a communications platform to a computation platform. We have investigated five cascading levels of collaboration sought by leading firms today (diagram below).

The lower levels cascade up to the higher levels which in turn inform and set the context for the lower levels"

When you look at collaboration through this lens, then the ways in which we collaborate need to be rethought. The competitive landscape is being altered today by those organisations which understand the fundamental shifts that are taking place and are able to harness new models / approaches to business. They are able to compete very differently to traditional organisations, driving change and rules of competition to differentiate themselves through greater value or lower cost in ways not previously perceived as possible.

For me the greatest challenge as I see it is to get our organisations to understand the changes taking place, how they will impact the business and how to break away from traditional views on collaboration that will allow success in the open networks that are evolving today.

The disconnect in KM

I have just been reading a post by Luis Suarez titled: APQC KM & Innovation 1007 - The Disconnect between KM 1.0 and KM 2.0 where he laments the awareness of knowledge practitioners around social computing and the focus of this training course around KM as it was in the 1990's:

"Here is an example, of the 44 people who were attending the training session I was at as well, in between breaks and networking events, I tried to find out if there would be anyone out there from the list who would have been exposed to social computing, or KM 2.0, or not. And to my astonishment, I couldn't. At least, I haven't been able to find anyone thus far. In fact, when I checked the list of attendees I just couldn't find anyone coming from that strong social computing background I was hoping for. Yes, bringing the best of social networking on to the table as well, since it is also part of the equation. Well, it just didn't happen.

From all of that, I guess I got a strong confirmation that people doing work related to social computing are not very much interested in Knowledge Management, in general. In fact, I would venture to say that for them it is a dirty word still. And vice versa, people who still want to keep things very much like KM 1.0 are not interested in hearing some more about social software and the impact that is having within the corporate world empowering knowledge workers to share their knowledge and collaborate a lot easier and with a whole lot less hassle. Ouch! Yes, that is what I meant with a massive disconnect. And it is not a good thing."

I have seen this happening first hand, and it is a scary thought that knowledge practitioners who should be at the forefront of facilitating the sharing of knowledge, are so stuck in their ways and in their comfort zone. There is a real danger that they cannot see beyond a focus on content, processes and tools they will relegated to dinosaur status, and this will have a real detrimental impact in the value knowledge can provide their organisation. I agree with Luis that there is a challenge to bring both those comfortable with the "old ways" of knowledge in line with those supporting social computing and Web 2.0 - but unless people are willing to at least see what is happening with knowledge sharing today they will be bypassed in the organisation and become irrelevant as people break through in their desire to build networks, have conversations and collaborate in real time.

What really stuns me is that this is an exciting time to be in the knowledge space - yes it does require a change in perspective, but when you look at knowledge sharing through a different lens, the possibilities are endless. Where this will end up who knows - but boy the ride will be amazing!!

Social computing upends past knowledge management archetypes

I recently was forwarded a trend paper produced by Forrester Research titled: "Social Computing Upends Past Knowledge Management Archetypes". I cannot link or reproduce the entire paper due to copyright, but thought I would provide the Exec Summary which by itself is quite interesting.

"When knowledge management (KM) practices, tools, and architectures burst onto the scene in the mid-1990's, the looked a lot like the old economy business that built them, hierarchical and work flow driven. Now, Social Computing tools are flattening those architectures and extending the reach of KM well beyond the walls of the conventional enterprise to touch customers and business partners. Information and KM professionals are becoming knowledge facilitators, and they must get smart fast to capitalise on this trend. Although disruptive, Social Computing will transform KM, shifting the emphasis from repositories, which are hard to build and maintain, to more intuitive, tacit knowledge sharing. Social computing is becoming the new KM, moving it from an often too academic exercise into the real world of people sharing knowledge and expertise with each other naturally, without even thinking about it."

This paper certainly provided me with much enthusiasm to see what I have been talking about becoming more mainstream. It also left me with a feeling of frustration that a lot of big organisations still are not even in this space, let alone seeing the urgent need to develop social network strategies for corporate knowledge. I continually see a focus on the technology - a "new toy" to play with, yet little thought being placed in the development of a road map for the organisation - what will the impact / value add be of embracing a social network approach to the business - is the culture of the organisation ready to support such a move - how will we educate our people to the benefits of being more networked - does management understand and support this change in the business - just to name a few big questions!

Anyway - ultimately it will be those organisations that embrace this challenge today that will have competitive advantage and an enhanced value proposition tomorrow....

Serious business - Web 2.0 goes corporate - EIU Report

The EIU have just released a really interesting report: Serious business - Web 2.0 goes corporate. Dare I say that perhaps we are reaching the tipping point! This paper is a great paper to take to management to open their eyes to the need to consider Web 2.0.

Some of the major takeouts from the paper are:

• 31% of companies think that using the web as a platform for sharing and collaboration will affect all parts of their business
• Almost four fifths of executives surveyed see the sharing and collaboration aspects of Web 2.0 as an opportunity to increase their companies revenue and/or margins
• Nearly 60% of big companies surveyed say they are for example inviting customers to contribute content that explains, supports, promotes or enhances their products, or that they plan to do so within the coming two years
• 47% of companies are, or are planning to, treat customers as co-developers of products that they constantly improve in a continual "beta" testing phase
• Big business expects the repercussions of these new tools and methods to be far reaching: 58% say that their use of the web to partner with customers will impact on some or all parts of their business
• So far, early adopter companies have focused their Web 2.0 efforts on the creation of online communities that can help with product marketing or the development of new products. Right behind that, companies are setting up blogs or wikis to initiate conversations either inside or outside the company (49%)

What I found most encouraging is that these results are validating the need for Knowledge Management to change the focus away from content to connecting people as outlined in an earlier post Direction of KM

One quote from the report really stood out to me in the context of collaborating around knowledge:

"The value is not in the delivery of knowledge, but in the alchemy of knowledge, in the ability to connect thoughts that weren't previously connected"

A very thought provoking quote indeed!

Have you had a look at the Adventures in Knowledge Anecdotes wiki? Come on - everyone has experiences  - good and bad about sharing knowledge - we would like to hear about yours!