Tag: knowledge management

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Face-to-Face Still Matters

Earlier today we wrapped up three consecutive days of video teleconferences to train five new knowledge managers. The trainees were located in Greenville, Calgary and Houston, while the other trainers and I were primarly located in Southern California. In better economic times, our trainees would have travelled to Southern California for the week,  spending some serious face time not only with those of us leading the training, but with most of the core KM team.

This face-to-face KM immersion did two things:

First, it allowed them to focus on what they where learning, without the distractions of the everyday office activities around them. Sitting and working side-by-side with the KM team gave them an opportunity to really absorb a great deal of knowledge that wasn’t necessarily a part of the training outline.

But the second, and even more important result was the relationships that were built. In most cases, this gathering was the first time we worked together. In addition to spending most of the work week together, we would eat lunch together and even go out afterwards for dinner or go sailing. The bond that formed provided a solid foundation for an ongoing working relationship. They felt comfortable coming to us because they knew us well. They trusted us, and knew we were there to help them. They understood the gravity of their new role as knowledge managers. They reached out for help or to brainstorm solutions for integrating knowledge management into their community’s work processes, and gladly participated when we asked them to help us with an enterprise KM initiative.

Doing this via video teleconference has required a change in approach. Sessions are shorter, with more pre-reading and pre-work. There are exercises that require multiple touch points with the KM team, ensuring that they will talk with someone on the team on a fairly regular basis. Will this suffice? Not a chance.

Fellow KM-er David Gurteen recently shared a great article on Harvard Business Review via this tweet:

[blackbirdpie url=”https://twitter.com/#!/davidgurteen/status/38593360214106112″]

In his article Why Face-to-Face Meetings Make All the Difference, Stephen Greer describes how use used face-to-face meetings to build and strengthen relationships with his leadership team. Greer concedes that after the relationships had been established, he was able to reduce the frequency of meetings, and conduct more of them remotely.

“Over time, once personalities gelled and relationships bonded, we were able to scale back the frequent flyer miles by making it a quarterly face-to-face meeting, with monthly conference calls in between. Today a videoconference would be the preferable alternative, as technology is definitely bringing distant operations closer together.”

Note that he didn’t jump straight away to conference calls. He notes that it took time to build and bond relationships with face-to-face meetings. Only after those relationships were bonded could they scale back the frequency and begin leveraging alternative technology like video teleconferencing.

Yes, face-to-face still matters.

The challenge is this: What do you do when face-to-face is not an option? How do you build those relationships that are necessary to create trust between people who don’t really know each other that well?

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Knowledge Management is Not a Software Solution

At Fluor, one of our favorite sayings about knowledge management is that “KM is not about the tool!” We aren’t Luddites by any means. Ineffective tools can inhibit the success of KM, just as woodworker would struggle with a dull blade.

Conversing with our colleagues at other companies, participating in best practice studies with APQC, through industry KM groups and informal discussions with other KM professionals — both inside our industry and beyond — have reaffirmed this point.

Technology is not a critical factor to successful knowledge management.

Today on Nick Milton’s Knoco stories blog, he poses the question: What was KM like, before IT?  How did we manage knowledge in medieval times? A provocative concept, since so many people immediately jump to technology when thinking of KM.

Overwhelmingly, the organizations that struggle to achieve success with KM do so because of this inappropriate focus on technology. The theory goes, “if only we had SharePoint (or Yammer, or Wikis, or fill-in-the-blank), sharing knowledge would be easy.”

And it’s true, to a point. Today, we have an abundance of tools that do indeed make it easier to share our knowledge, and many of them are excellent. We don’t have a technology problem.

It’s the difficult part that people either overlook or give inadequate emphasis; the soft part… people.

For KM to deliver value to an organization, the people who possess the knowledge and the people that need the knowledge need to connect. The right behaviors, motivators and a culture of collaboration and knowledge sharing needs to be nurtured. Leaders must determine how they can weave these principles into their work process, or transform those processes completely in ways that deliver value and ultimately supports the organization’s strategic vision.

This has implications that reach far beyond knowledge management. If you examine the success of Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, you’ll find that the people who get the most out of them are not necessarily the most sophisticated techno-geeks, nor the ones with the most “friends.” They are the ones who use technology to help them build and strengthen relationships — be they personal or professional. Once again, “it’s the people.”

I share this to remind myself, as well as stimulating one or two you. Tomorrow I’ll be training four, bright new knowledge managers. On this, their third day of training, we will be looking at (you guessed it) the tool.

Personally, I love tools. They can be a godsend, and enable global collaboration in a way that wasn’t possible when I began my career. But just as it’s not possession of the tools that makes a master craftsman, success in KM has far more to do with people and process.

Photo credit: Hans Splinter

Posted on by — Leave a comment

APQC 2011 Knowledge Management Conference

Larry Prusak speaking at the 2010 APQC KM Conference

Knowledge Management (KM) is a phrase that confounds many. Many companies and organizations that attempt to “manage their knowledge” fail miserably. The problem, it seems, is not so much with the concept as it is the terminology.

Simply put, knowledge management is a systematic approach to helping people share knowledge with each other. My friends at Shell sum it up with the  succinct phrase — “Ask, Learn, Share*.”

Knowledge management helps people connect with the knowledge and the expertise they need.

In that spirit of sharing, I invite you to join me at APQC’s 2011 Knowledge Management Conference. This 16th annual conference will be held in Houston on May 9-13th, 2011.

The APQC KM Conference is one of the most valuable  I’ve attended. There is a strong emphasis on practitioners sharing their real-world experience with other practitioners. Being able to build and strengthen connections with other change agents sets APQC apart from the usual vendor-heavy conferences.

I’ll be sharing my knowledge, and will be speaking with John McQuary, VP of Knowledge Management at Fluor on Friday morning. Our session? It’s titled “The Future of Knowledge Management: A Vision for 2020.” Here’s the synopsis:

Over the past ten years, Fluor’s knowledge management program has achieved success and recognition both inside and outside the enterprise. KM is no longer an initiative, but simply the way we get things done and drive strategic value. Looking ten years into the future, what is the next step in the evolution of KM? Using a “day in the life” perspective, this session will look at the implications and opportunities for KM in the future, with specific actions you can take now to begin making that vision a reality in your enterprise.

Working in the knowledge management realm over the past ten years, I’ve seen tremendous growth and success. Yet even with the success we’ve achieved, the opportunity in the decade ahead grows larger still.

I’m excited about the opportunity to share my passion with you. If you or your organization or company is involved in knowledge management (or considering doing so), I urge you to join me at APQC.

Planning to attend? Please introduce yourself now! Let’s begin the dialog today (here or on twitter), and we can continue face-to-face in May.

*Bonus!

For reading down this far, here a video produced for Shell that illustrates their Ask-Learn-Share approach. It’s a fine explanation of knowledge management in real world terms. Enjoy!

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Successful KM Storytelling

If a story is not about the hearer he will not listen... - Steinbeck

Before we developed written languages, storytelling allowed us to pass down our history and knowledge from one generation to the next. Even today, storytelling remains a powerful medium. A well-told story with a meaningful message is easier to remember, internalize and share.

Earlier today I chatted with fellow knowledge management (KM) colleagues at KMers.org on the subject of corporate storytelling and knowledge management, and I promised to share my storytelling story.

At Fluor, storytelling almost always takes a written form. Naturally, people share their stories in person or in teleconferences, but our emphasis is on written stories. This definition of “storytelling” is different from many other organizations.

Our stories are real-world examples that illustrate the value of knowledge management. I recognize that there are stories that do not involve either success nor any form of knowledge sharing. While they can be valuable in their own right, they fall out of my organization’s scope.

These KM success stories are collected both informally and formally. Informally, we simply ask people to share examples of how knowledge sharing (a more accessible term than KM) and collaboration has benefited them, their project or the client. This past year we asked this question in on of our KM discussion forums and had over 30 responses — some good, some great and some everyday examples of KM at work. The best of these were identified and more formally captured.

Our formal success story process encourages people to share stories year-round. Each year during the month of Knowvember we review the stories shared over the past 12 months, selecting a list of finalists. These are presented to a panel of C-level executives that select the winning stories. There is no fixed number of finalists or winners, but in 2010 we collected roughly 300 stories, culled this down to 20 finalists from which the executives selected six winners. If you’re success story is selected as a winner, you get to select a local charitable organization to which a $500 donation is made in your name.

Sharing Success

We use a specific form designed to guide you through the success story process. It asks for a description of the story and how it brought value, and prompts for supporting metrics, quotes and details.

Our guidelines are pretty simple:

  1. Share your success story in the most appropriate knowledge community (our virtual communities of practice). If you’re not sure where it best fits, we help guide you.
  2. Read the instructions on the success story form, filling it out completely.
  3. Define what specific elements make the story a success. What internal or client value was generated?
  4. Add images and quotes to give the story added credibility.

We supplement these basic guidelines with a few good examples from previous years.

Some of these stories are shared with a well-written narrative voice. Others have obvious value, but need to be rewritten in a way that really tells the story with impact.

Along the way, these stories are shared though our KM system, with new messages displayed a couple times each week providing a regular and not-so-subtle reminder of how knowledge sharing can generate value.

During the final judging for the annual contest, the exposure these stories and the people involved get at a very high level of the organization serves two purposes: it provides recognition to folks who are often from far flung offices, and it reminds our executives of some very concrete ways KM strengthens and improves our company. And we’ve found that these stories provide the most tangible measure of the value of knowledge management — much more than the number of clicks and downloads.

What’s Next for Storytelling?

We conducted a very low-budget experiment last year, and was a big success. We asked our local KM champions to use their smartphones and video-capable digital cameras to record a few employees — very informally and without rehearsal — answering just a three questions:

  1. What was the last thing you did in our KM system?
  2. What was their favorite knowledge community (CoP) and why? And
  3. Who encourages you to share and leverage knowledge?

These low-budget, quick-and-dirty video recordings were reviewed and we created a series of short, 2-3 minute compilation videos. The results are compelling, and we will likely do this again, perhaps with different questions. While they won’t replace the more formal success story process, they do provide a compelling story for other employees.

Of course, there are many ways to tell a story. This is just ours, and as with all KM efforts, we are constantly evolving and adapting to improve the process.

What’s your storytelling story?

Thanks to Lilly Evans for moderating today’s KMers.org tweet chat! You can read the complete transcript here.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

If I Were The Boss…

Knowledge management (KM) can help transform an organization as people begin to connect, leveraging the best knowledge and expertise to improve work processes and deliverables. Last week, I discussed what KM means on a personal level. In many ways, KM thinking is a mindset. The KM mind questions the value of everything, and challenges us to upend the status quo and discover innovative solutions.

One of the ways I sharpen my own KM mindset is through discussion and collaboration with other KM professionals and evangelists. Early today in one of those groups — KMers.org — we discussed how we would run things (from a KM mindset) “if I were the boss.”

Rob Swanwick moderated this tweet chat, seeding the conversation with three questions on “how we would run things (from a KM mindset)”:

  1. If I ran conferences…
  2. If I ran all meetings…
  3. If I controlled the direction for social media in my organization…

This led to a lively discussion with Rob Swanwick, Kate Bowers, Stan Garfield, Barbara Fillip, Liz Williams and others. While there were some excellent, practical tips for running conferences, meetings and managing social media, there was one key concept that particularly stuck out above all else:

THE REAL VALUE LIES IN RELATIONSHIPS

I used to get excited about what I would learn at a conference. It’s taken a few years, but now I understand that the real value isn’t in the content of any particular presentation or discussion, but in the relationships forged and strengthened. Recent research at IBM and MIT confirms this, even going so far as to put a dollar value on those connections. In their estimation, each contact is worth $948 in revenue.

Putting aside the absurdity of assigning a dollar value to a relationship, I suggest that the real value is much, much higher. And we understand this, intrinsically. During our tweet chat, I posed the following question to illustrate this point:

Which has more potential value? The chat transcript of any of these sessions, or the relationships built & strengthened?

While this in no way diminishes the value of the chat, discussion or presentation itself, it does drive home the point that what really matters is the connections. In knowing you, I am a better person. And vice versa. Together we are smarter, more productive, more interesting, more capable than we could ever be on our own. Our diverse perspectives and experience blend to create a wonderful collaborative stew.

If you’re interested in more, you can read the full tweet chat transcript, and continue the dialogue. If you are a KMer, please join is each Tuesday at noon Eastern time for our weekly tweet chat, hosted at KMers.org, and share your thoughts on the future of KM.

Posted on by — 4 Comments

What is Personal Knowledge Management?

A word cloud generated from my RSS feed

Earlier today I participated in the weekly KMers.org tweet chat. This week’s discussion was hosted by Kate Bower, discussing the role of self management and self regulation in personal knowledge management (PKM). There was some dissent as to whether PKM required a certain level of obsessive compulsive disorder — OCD — or whether there it was possible to use more of a mad scientist approach to PKM.

To answer the question, you must first define personal knowledge management. What exactly is PKM?

Wikipedia defines PKM as: “a collection of processes that an individual carries out to gather, classify, store, search, retrieve, and share knowledge in his/her daily activities and how these processes support work activities.”

In my view, there are three dimensions to personal knowledge management.

First, you need an awareness of your knowledge. You have to know what it is that you know. This is challenging for many people, whether out of modesty or a lack of self-awareness, but technology is helping. Tools like desktop search and word clouds can help surface the subjects that we have a keen interest in — our likely areas of expertise and knowledge.

Next, you need to be open to learning. Equally important to knowing what you know is knowing what you don’t know, and being open to learning and growing. None of us have a monopoly on knowledge. Some might argue that PKM devalues the need for knowledge sharing with others, but the opposite is closer to the truth. As we understand what we know — and do not know — we see where we can contribute to the larger group. At the same time, we see how we can leverage the knowledge and expertise of others in that group where we have gaps in our own knowledge.

Finally, you must be open to sharing. Unless your tacit knowledge is applied, is it really knowledge at all? What is the value of knowledge that goes unused and unshared?  And the beauty of knowledge sharing is that there is an infinite supply. If I give my knowledge to you, I still retain possession. It’s simply multiplied.

As personal knowledge is shared, the entire organization grows and benefits.

During the course of our chat, several members (myself included) described their approach to PKM as that of an mad scientist. I’m not particularly rigorous about folders, hierarchy and information organization. I’d much prefer to leverage technology to help percolate my knowledge to the top.

There are two excellent tools that can help with this.

First, personal search. Simply being able to search my hard drives for the information is often much faster than navigation down a series of folders, especially since search can look beyond file names into the actual content. Search is built into both my Windows 7 PC and my Mac. For email, I use Gmail, which provides super-fast searches through my entire email archive. There are also third-party search tools that will index your hard drive, but I’m quite content with the simplicity of the built-in search.

A word cloud generated from my Delicious bookmarks

Second, word clouds. Wordle.net will take your blog or your Delicious bookmarks and automatically create a word cloud based on the topics that appear most frequently. Word clouds are a great way to visualize the relative importance of topics, as the size of each word is determined by the number of times it appears.

These tools are simply aids that will help you divine your interests (and theoretically areas where you might have some budding expertise). The next steps — growing and sharing — are up to you.

What does PKM mean to you, and what tools and techniques have you found useful?

Posted on by — 1 Comment

What is Quora, and Why Should I Care?

If you haven’t heard of Quora, you should. It’s been getting a lot of buzz. What is Quora? According to their website, “Quora is a continually improving collection of questions and answers created, edited, and organized by everyone who uses it. Quora was founded in April 2009 by Adam D’Angelo, who was previously CTO and VP of engineering at Facebook, and Charlie Cheever, who led Facebook Connect and Facebook Platform. Quora is privately held and funded by Benchmark Capital, and is based in Palo Alto, CA.”

Having been involved in discussion forums, developing online communities such as BigBlueBall as well as enterprise communities in the context of knowledge management (KM), what’s interesting to me is how Quora takes the traditional threaded discussion format and completely reinvents it, with some excellent results.

Granted, there are important differences between Quora and a discussion forum. Quora is specifically and exclusively suited to a question and answer format. Forums can serve a much broader purpose, including open discussions, brainstorming and ad hoc, asynchronous collaboration. But when you look at most forums, a large percentage of the discussions begin with someone who needs help (they have a question) and subsequent responses (answers, in the best case scenario).

How does Quora do this differently? First of all, forums typically require the participants to begin by navigating to the category that is best suited to their topic. This alone can quickly become a barrier, as the way I would categorize something might be very different than the way other people would. In Quora, you simply ask a question. You have the option of tagging a question with one or more keywords (roughly analogous to categories). Other Quora users can follow (think subscribe) specific questions if they are curious about the answer, or they can follow a tag and get notified of any activity tagged with that keyword.

Second, where forum are typically listed in either a threaded view (i.e. Slashdot) or chronological view, Quora allows the responses to be resorted. Other Quora users can vote on the best answers, and they percolate to the top.

The Q&A type site isn’t really anything new. Google tried it before, and failed. Yahoo! Answers is another service that has hung in there, but the quality is spotty. So far, the quality of the responses has really set Quora apart. It’s not uncommon to see a CEO or founder of a company jump in with a response to a question about their business model. The particpants, by and large, are a higher caliber than I’ve seen in similar systems.

What happens next? Last week at the Social Media MasterMinds meetup in Orange County, we speculated that the opportunity for Quora has already come and gone. The theory is that once it goes mainstream, the quality suffers. The noise level increases as people look for ways to “use” Quora to improve their SEO, market their company or service, or insert spam links for pharmaceuticals.

I’m still in discovery mode on Quora. I’m following a few topics — some personal (hiking) and some professional (knowledge management). I’ve voted up a few good answers, added an answer, and asked a couple questions (with mixed results so far). The process has been interesting and even useful, but the jury is still out on whether I’ll stick with it. For now, you can me find here on Quora.

If you work with forums, online communities or KM, Quora is worth looking at. Consider it food for thought.