Technical article
Knowledge management
There are several commonly accepted definitions;
-
Knowledge Management (KM) is a term associated with the processes for the creation, dissemination, testing, integration, and utilisation of knowledge.
-
The collection of processes that govern the creation, dissemination, and leveraging of knowledge to fulfil organisational objectives
-
A business philosophy whereby KM is an emerging set of principles, processes, organisational structures, and technology applications that help people share and leverage their knowledge to meet their business objectives
Actually, the (KM) term is only a refined name for managing information. Academic rigor has been matched with what skilled practitioners have been doing with customer-focused information for some years. The previously information management regime tended to favour the use of “passive” information, usually in published form and the adoption of technology merely converted the formerly printed material into static documents capable of being viewed or perhaps downloaded to the user. The owners/publishers of such information remained largely concerned with document-management, version-control etc.
Data vs Information
There should be a clear distinction between data and information. Most organizations have an excess of data, often inaccessible to users in the format required to provide the specific information needed. For example:
-
“Passive” materials (brochures and typical web pages) prevent the user from interrogating (drilling down) to level of information required.
-
The information is often out of date before it leaves the printer
-
There are reduced opportunities to create and maintain the information in a “one-time-write” environment, because of preoccupation with the published output.
-
Numerous variants may be required to present subsets of the same information in ways meaningful to specific users. For example, an architect may be interested in design, dimensions and broad cost parameters. The maintenance fitter, conversely, is concerned with the functionality, assembly and perhaps replacement of the same item.
A more systematic approach to knowledge management requires a flow of information through the stakeholder value chain, encompassing, but largely independent of the type or format of that information. In this context, all information is assembled in a manner appropriate to the needs of the recipient, subject to suitable access restrictions.
.
It must not be assumed that the all information-seekers will use common terminology and for this reason, the effort of producing a glossary, lexicon or cross-reference facility can be invaluable. Part numbers may be insufficient so In many situations, the ability to select products/services by performance may be a clear benefit. This parametric search process is a feature of the better catalogue management software.
What Knowledge Management is NOT
KM is NOT a panacea for all management communications, nor is it a substitute for strategic clarity. The old maxim of “garbage in equals garbage out” is as true today as when the phrase was first coined in the early days of IT. In the simplest terms, sensible and deliverable objectives must be clearly defined along with effective strategies and methodologies for their execution. Failure of any one of these factors will generally be sufficient to derail the desired outcomes, or at least increase the time, cost and disruption factors.
KM is NOT a project that can be handed to the “IT” department OR to the “web designer.” Such personnel will surely have an important role in delivering the outcomes, but the overall responsibility of management at all appropriate levels of the organisation cannot be negated.
Structure, functionality & content
Frequently considered to be merely “IT” issues, there is a strong case for considering structure (or architecture), functionality and content as complementary, but separate elements of an effective KM system. Major problems can arise if the strategy for each element is not carefully evolved.
With the right management tools, content can be changed on demand and the “one-time-write” protocol simplifies this process considerably. If “version control” is needed, it is done at this time.
Functionality is another “movable feast” in that it can be modified or extended over time with relative ease as long as the KM strategy was effectively developed in the first place. Unfortunately, a bad (or no) strategy makes progressive functionality much harder and more expensive.
Clear goals and strategies can reduce potential cost and time to acceptable limits. “Bolt-on” applications can be made to work effectively with legacy systems through a “one-way loop” where data from a variety of sources is downloaded on demand and/or on a scheduled data dump basis. The solution lies in defining the characteristics and relationships of data fields and establishing appropriate management processes.
Data availability & format
The challenge for most organisations will be the proliferation of information in a variety of formats, locations and varying degrees of accuracy. Even the best-organised organisations may have text and images scattered throughout the world on servers, on CD, in print or in archived artwork.
Although the information may be in analogue formats, conversion to dynamic digital objects is manageable with the right combination of data management tools.
Standards
Knowledge Management is clearly a combination of science and “art.” Ultimately, there is no substitute for clear objectives, realistic strategies, allocation of appropriate resources and effective project-management.
It is common for management to avoid or defer capturing, classifying and cleaning information. This apparently daunting task also leads to a piecemeal approach likely to please no one. The need to produce the right mix of function and content that clearly demonstrates value to various stakeholders cannot be overstated. The actual solution is, as implied throughout this article, to determine clear goals and strategies, ensure that appropriate resources are applied to manage the project in a series of sequential stages. In this way, real progress will not only be made, but it will be demonstrable to the various stakeholders.
There is no doubt that organisations with appropriate resources can manage KM projects internally. However, realism is the key to on-time, on-budget delivery within acceptable performance parameters. This requires a combination of skill, experience, effective communication and above all - authority. Without these attributes, the entire project is likely to be fundamentally flawed and the only effective solution is to allocate authority along with responsibility to a suitably skilled practitioner.