Date   
Re: KM framework

Soha Radwan
 

Thanks Douglas 
The 2 categories you set have helped on solving this dilemma. I find it pretty logical to have different ways to manage different approaches 

Cheers 
Soha 


On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 9:55 pm, Douglas Weidner douglas.weidner@... [sikmleaders
wrote:
 

Dear Soha,

Your clarification is very helpful. You have hit upon a major KM dilemma. 

There are a number of good methodologies, which can be categorized into two groups.
Those we call a 'KM Systems Approach', which have as an underlying assumption (often unstated but implicit), that IT is the KM driver.

Other approaches, we call the 'KM Transformation Approach', explicitly defines IT as an enabler, but that human motivation (and subsequent performance) is the driver in the K Age.

Obviously, the resultant 'KM Strategies' are quite different.

Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:42 PM soha radwan soharadwan@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Thanks a lot All for your insights. 


Actually We do have a Knowledge and Innovation Strategy (which identifies the main strategic priorities based on internal and external environmental analysis).
For clarification, we as a government organization have to pass through various assessment and audit programs, where an essential requirement is to set our capabilities (strategies, approaches, programs , etc) post benchmarking with successful international  models . However, this doesn't ever mean to apply such models. But to build on and modify if applicable.
Definitely, I am not looking for a framework to copy and paste because simply it will never work. I totally understand, given that KM is all about enabling the organization to achieve its objectives, and not an end result per se. 

My question above came from another point (may be I was not very clear about it) which is, I have been noticing while researching that some models use the same methodology when dealing with information management and knowledge management. In other words, as if both can be managed in the same way. That's why I gave the example of the APQC . When I say if I apply it, it is Just  IF for the sake of the example, and doesn't mean that I will apply it regardless of what the business is.
The main point is managing both information and knowledge in the same manner - regardless of what kind of methodoly used- is not practical. Hope I can convey my message.

Thanks again for your valuable insights.

Soha. 





On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 7:31 pm, Douglas Weidner douglas.weidner@... [sikmleaders]
 

Understood. And that is the clarification I've provided...that a Framework by itself is insufficient.

A robust methodology is needed to determine the unique KM Strategy for the organization in question.

Too many KM newcomers (Soha?) think a Framework or Roadmap is sufficient.
Necessary, but not sufficient.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:45 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

To be clear, we view the KM Methodology recommended as part of the implementing practices that support the KM Framework based on the BOE and the existing KME..   

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:55
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Well stated Bill.

 

Our only difference may be semantics.

 

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

 

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

KM Institute

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.
  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).
  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay..

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha..

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework

Douglas Weidner
 

Dear Soha,

Your clarification is very helpful. You have hit upon a major KM dilemma. 

There are a number of good methodologies, which can be categorized into two groups.
Those we call a 'KM Systems Approach', which have as an underlying assumption (often unstated but implicit), that IT is the KM driver.

Other approaches, we call the 'KM Transformation Approach', explicitly defines IT as an enabler, but that human motivation (and subsequent performance) is the driver in the K Age.

Obviously, the resultant 'KM Strategies' are quite different.

Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:42 PM soha radwan soharadwan@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Thanks a lot All for your insights. 


Actually We do have a Knowledge and Innovation Strategy (which identifies the main strategic priorities based on internal and external environmental analysis).
For clarification, we as a government organization have to pass through various assessment and audit programs, where an essential requirement is to set our capabilities (strategies, approaches, programs , etc) post benchmarking with successful international  models . However, this doesn't ever mean to apply such models. But to build on and modify if applicable.
Definitely, I am not looking for a framework to copy and paste because simply it will never work. I totally understand, given that KM is all about enabling the organization to achieve its objectives, and not an end result per se. 

My question above came from another point (may be I was not very clear about it) which is, I have been noticing while researching that some models use the same methodology when dealing with information management and knowledge management. In other words, as if both can be managed in the same way. That's why I gave the example of the APQC . When I say if I apply it, it is Just  IF for the sake of the example, and doesn't mean that I will apply it regardless of what the business is.
The main point is managing both information and knowledge in the same manner - regardless of what kind of methodoly used- is not practical. Hope I can convey my message.

Thanks again for your valuable insights.

Soha. 





On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 7:31 pm, Douglas Weidner douglas.weidner@... [sikmleaders]
 

Understood. And that is the clarification I've provided...that a Framework by itself is insufficient.

A robust methodology is needed to determine the unique KM Strategy for the organization in question.

Too many KM newcomers (Soha?) think a Framework or Roadmap is sufficient.
Necessary, but not sufficient.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:45 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

To be clear, we view the KM Methodology recommended as part of the implementing practices that support the KM Framework based on the BOE and the existing KME..   

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:55
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Well stated Bill.

 

Our only difference may be semantics.

 

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

 

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

KM Institute

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.
  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).
  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay..

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha..

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework

Soha Radwan
 

Thanks a lot All for your insights. 

Actually We do have a Knowledge and Innovation Strategy (which identifies the main strategic priorities based on internal and external environmental analysis).
For clarification, we as a government organization have to pass through various assessment and audit programs, where an essential requirement is to set our capabilities (strategies, approaches, programs , etc) post benchmarking with successful international  models . However, this doesn't ever mean to apply such models. But to build on and modify if applicable.
Definitely, I am not looking for a framework to copy and paste because simply it will never work. I totally understand, given that KM is all about enabling the organization to achieve its objectives, and not an end result per se. 

My question above came from another point (may be I was not very clear about it) which is, I have been noticing while researching that some models use the same methodology when dealing with information management and knowledge management. In other words, as if both can be managed in the same way. That's why I gave the example of the APQC . When I say if I apply it, it is Just  IF for the sake of the example, and doesn't mean that I will apply it regardless of what the business is.
The main point is managing both information and knowledge in the same manner - regardless of what kind of methodoly used- is not practical. Hope I can convey my message.

Thanks again for your valuable insights.

Soha. 





On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 7:31 pm, Douglas Weidner douglas.weidner@... [sikmleaders]
wrote:
 

Understood. And that is the clarification I've provided...that a Framework by itself is insufficient.

A robust methodology is needed to determine the unique KM Strategy for the organization in question.

Too many KM newcomers (Soha?) think a Framework or Roadmap is sufficient.
Necessary, but not sufficient.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:45 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

To be clear, we view the KM Methodology recommended as part of the implementing practices that support the KM Framework based on the BOE and the existing KME..   

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:55
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Well stated Bill.

 

Our only difference may be semantics.

 

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

 

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

KM Institute

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.
  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).
  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay..

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha..

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Jan 15 SIKM Call: Jean-Claude Monney - Digital KM Transformation

Stan Garfield
 

This is a reminder of tomorrow's monthly call from 11 am to 12 noon EST.

SIKM Leaders Community Monthly Call


Re: KM framework

Stan Garfield
 

Re: KM framework

 

I gave up

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 09:38
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Hi Chris,

Bill had the same problem when trying to open the attachment from the email.  You can access it from the web post.

Best

Paul

 

Paul McDowall

Know How Works

Ottawa, Canada

Tel: 613-825-7374

Cell: 613-796-7257

Web: www.knowhowworks.com

Re: KM framework

Douglas Weidner
 

Understood. And that is the clarification I've provided...that a Framework by itself is insufficient.

A robust methodology is needed to determine the unique KM Strategy for the organization in question.

Too many KM newcomers (Soha?) think a Framework or Roadmap is sufficient.
Necessary, but not sufficient.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:45 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

To be clear, we view the KM Methodology recommended as part of the implementing practices that support the KM Framework based on the BOE and the existing KME..   

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:55
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Well stated Bill.

 

Our only difference may be semantics.

 

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

 

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

KM Institute

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.
  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).
  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay..

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha.

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework [1 Attachment]

paul_mcdowall
 

Hi Chris,
Bill had the same problem when trying to open the attachment from the email.  You can access it from the web post.
Best
Paul

Paul McDowall
Know How Works
Ottawa, Canada
Web: www.knowhowworks.com

Re: KM framework

 

To be clear, we view the KM Methodology recommended as part of the implementing practices that support the KM Framework based on the BOE and the existing KME..   

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:55
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Well stated Bill.

 

Our only difference may be semantics.

 

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

 

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

 

Cheers,

Douglas Weidner

Chief CKM Instructor

KM Institute

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.
  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).
  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay..

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@yahoogroups..com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha.

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework

Douglas Weidner
 

Well stated Bill.

Our only difference may be semantics.

For instance, you focused on the KM Strategy, which is indeed critical.

I'm focusing on the KM Methodology - which is meant to create a unique outcome--the KM Strategy, which is itself dictated by the organization's status. Or, as you say, "the unique characteristics and mission of the organization." 

Cheers,
Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor
KM Institute

 

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bill Kaplan bill@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.

  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).

  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay.

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha.

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework

Douglas Weidner
 

Dear Soha,

I'm afraid you are putting too much hope in a perfect definition of 'Frameworks' and 'Roadmaps' versus your real needs.
Possibly you are missing a key point, which I discern from your follow on questions.

In one sense, a Framework is a basic structure underlying a system or concept, whereas a 'Roadmap', often a graphic, shows a plan for achieving a goal, typically with some hi-level detail. But, in my opinion what you needs is the last in the triad..a KM Methodology. 

If a roadmap tells you what needs to be done, as it should, a robust methodology tells you how to do it, often (and hopefully) in great detail, including: 
proven activities, staffing, expected timeframes, and even barriers to success that must be overcome, and much more.

For instance, a good methodology would have you hone in on the greatest opportunities, which may not be just 'generic' knowledge sharing and learning activities.
For instance, many organizations are still attempting to improve K retention (retirement and turnover). The solution for them is a very well-defined and proven initiative we call K Retention and Continuity.

Best wishes,
Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor
KM Institute






On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:45 AM soha radwan soharadwan@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.


2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 
On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 
However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.
If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

Many thanks,

Soha.





On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:


 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

You can download it at:

Re: KM framework

 

Been reading through these conversations as well as this subject within other conversations not associated with sikmleaders.

 

I offer some thought from my years of practice in designing and implementing KM frameworks in the public, private, and international sectors.

 

  1. KM Frameworks (how) and the underlying KM Strategy (what)  that supports KM implementation and future sustainment of the framework must be (1) context relevant and (2) fit-for- purpose to the organization to which they apply.

  2. Cloning, lifting,  or copying an existing framework, and subsequently the underlying KM strategy, rarely works well over the longer term because it may not be entirely business or operationally relevant in the necessary detail for it to be sustainable for success (one size does not fit all).

  3. I believe KM Frameworks and the underlying KM Strategy must first be based on a deep understating of the organization’s business and operational  environment (BOE) tied to the mission and strategic vison of the organization and the organization’s existing current state knowledge management environment (KME) assessed in multiple specific areas. This is so that any recommendations being made are aligned with and support the unique characteristics  and mission of the organization and its workforce dynamics/processes and the KM vison of the leadership and the organization’s workforce.  This essential to making change happen because the organization sees change as valuable to success.

 

It's much more complicated than this basic explanation. The take away is that KM Strategies and KM Framework should be aligned with the DNA of the subject organization…not a top down overlay.

 

For consideration

 

Best

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

  

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 

 

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 00:45
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: KM framework

 

 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

 

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

 

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.

 

 

2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 

On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 

However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.

If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

 

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

 

Many thanks,

 

Soha.

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

 

 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

 

You can download it at:

 

Re: KM framework [1 Attachment]

Christoph Voegeli
 

Hi paul ...i tried to open the att doc but no success ....is there a hypelink....? Appreciate your help rgds chris

On Sunday, January 13, 2019, 11:19:40 PM GMT+7, paul_mcdowall@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:


 
[Attachment(s) from paul_mcdowall@... [sikmleaders] included below]

Hi Soha,
Since the best KM strategies are aligned closely with business needs, the best KM frameworks are reflective of the business focus for KM.  As an example, I'm including a KM Framework I developed for one government organization.  The KM program I developed was hugely successful and the framework reflected the business focus.
Best
Paul

Paul McDowall
Know How Works
Ottawa, Canada
Tel: 613-825-7374
Cell: 613-796-7257
Web: www.knowhowworks.com

Re: KM framework

Soha Radwan
 

Many thanks for the replies. Thanks Jeff, Tom and Paul for sharing such valuable materials.

Going through the literature, I have noticed few things, I will appreciate your feedback on a couple:

1- I have noticed that some times the concept (KM framework) can be used to represent a holistic approach ( including all influencers) or can be used to represent an operational approach (how knowledge is managed) and sometimes referred to as a KM Model.


2- Some operational frameworks - like for example the APQC Framework - tackle both tangibles (docs and info or what some call it Explicit Knowledge) and intangibles (processes of knowledge sharing activities which entail managing the genuine knowledge) in the same way, or using the same model. 
On a practical ground, if I want to apply how documents and info are managed (starting from identifying what we need to capture all through till they are used in adding value to the organization) I can use such framework. 
However If I want to apply this framework on managing and utilizing employees knowledge through designing knowledge sharing and learning activities based on needs, piloting them, and then documenting and sharing the outcomes, it will not very feasible to be applied (or maybe I miss something). I think when a part of this knowledge is documented, I can then start apply this model.
If so, do you think we can design 2 models/ frameworks, one for the so called Explicit Knowledge (Docs on internal portal)  and another for managing the genuine knowledge which they refer to as Implicit knowledge.

Would appreciate your valuable feedback on both points.

Many thanks,

Soha.





On Sunday, 13 January 2019, 21:50:52 GMT+4, Jeff Stemke jstemke@... [sikmleaders]


 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

You can download it at:

Re: KM framework

Jeff Stemke
 

For your consideration. I recently shared a white paper describing my KM vision. 

This paper describes how effective knowledge transfer can create extraordinary value in your critical business metrics while helping to ensure that your workforce has the capabilities, expertise, flexibility and resilience to adapt to change and thrive versus your competition. 

It covers the business value, a comprehensive set of effective knowledge transfer processes, tools and behavior shaping that represent the four pillars of an effective strategy.

You can download it at:

Re: KM framework

Tom Short <tman9999@...>
 

You might consider one of the many KM Maturity Models that are out there, rather than a framework, per se. A maturity model would help you evaluate both where your company is with regard to collecting, organizing and re-using stuff, measuring value of doing it, etc., while also pointing the way toward what you should be focused on achieving next. 

I’m sure there are relevant items in Stan Garfield’s excellent collection. Here’s one I found via a quick Google search: https://medium.com/@stangarfield/knowledge-management-maturity-models-fd094ed49e48

Good luck with your effort.

Tom Short
San Francisco

Re: KM framework

paul_mcdowall
 

Hi Soha,
Since the best KM strategies are aligned closely with business needs, the best KM frameworks are reflective of the business focus for KM.  As an example, I'm including a KM Framework I developed for one government organization.  The KM program I developed was hugely successful and the framework reflected the business focus.
Best
Paul

Paul McDowall
Know How Works
Ottawa, Canada
Web: www.knowhowworks.com

KM framework

Soha Radwan
 

Hi All,

I am actually working on setting up a kind of a  high level Knowledge Management framework/ Model to wrap up the how KM is managed in the organization. 


We do actually have a Knowledge and Innovation Management Strategy. We also have some Procedures written for some initiatives For example:

-  Managing internal Knowledge resources - Starting from Identifying knowledge resources (as some call it Explicit Knowledge)  to be captured all through sharing them on the internal portal  to be used and then assess the usage and utilization.

- Managing external Knowledge resources - Almost like the above initiative Procedure, but it is about knowledge resources brought in from external sources.

- Creating  Employee profiling - Something like LinkedIN - to enable collaboration 

Besides some other Knowledge sharing and learning activities (online and Physical)


what do you think could be a kind of a high level KM framework/ Model from the literature could be helpful to wrap these up.

Thanks and regards,
Soha

January 17 SF Bay Area KM professionals meeting

Linda Nellett
 

The next meeting of SF Bay Area KM professionals will be held on Thursday, January 17 from 2 to 3:30 pm at Crowe LLP, 575 Market Street, #3300, San Francisco.


At this Bay Area KM meetup, we’ll discuss projects and help each other think through options and ideas for for challenges or improvements. 


If you cannot attend in person, we will also have a conference line. Please reply to this message or email me at lnellett@... to confirm your attendance and indicate if it will be in person or via conference line. Building security requires the names of people attending in person, so please provide your name in full as it appears on the ID you will be using. 

Re: Looking for project ideas in the field of knowledge management

Murray Jennex
 

okay, you looked but you have also said that you don't believe KM is a people issue so you didn't really absorb all that research


-----Original Message-----
From: 'Randhir R.P' randhir.rp@... [sikmleaders]
To: sikmleaders
Sent: Thu, Jan 10, 2019 3:10 am
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: Looking for project ideas in the field of knowledge management



I did Murray. As a matter of fact, went through the publications of top 5 journals of the last five years, looking for relevant insights. I think I created a list of more than 1000+ journal papers, including some papers from top management journals. Would share a snap shot of the analysis. I used the key words to do the study.

Regards

Randhir

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 2:33 PM Murray Jennex murphjen@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 
sorry I don't agree with you and I just don't think you've looked at the KM research literature.


-----Original Message-----
From: 'Randhir R.P' randhir.rp@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...>
To: sikmleaders <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2019 8:38 pm
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Re: Looking for project ideas in the field of knowledge management



Hi Murray,
 
Went through the 10 project ideas and I am afraid, they reflect a KM thinking from which we should run away very fast. If these are the topics that are being actively researched by academicians, then we have something to worry about.
 
The suggestions are heavily people oriented to promote KM. People oriented KM will always find it difficult to ensure reuse of knowledge. Instead of finding ways to make employees ask questions, we should find why employees keep asking the same question. Best practices and lessons learned should never be sitting in databases. They should be incorporated in processes, tools or into training materials and removed from databases. Of the mentioned subjects, I find the one related to AI relevant....
 
I concur with you, that academicians are doing interesting work on KM. However it is few and far in between. Very few of them make a meaningful impact and the time to make impact may be decades. There was a very interesting paper by Roger Bohn, titled “Measuring and Managing Technological Knowledge”, which was published in MIT Sloan in 1994. Almost 25 years back!! That is the direction KM function should take, but we will take years to reach there.
 
Regards
 
Randhir

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 2:25 AM nancydixon commonknowledge.org nancydixon@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 
[Attachment(s) from nancydixon commonknowledge.org included below]
This is article is my thinking on KM and projects, “Does your Organization have an asking problem?”



On Jan 8, 2019, at 7:35 PM, Murray Jennex murphjen@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

Nice post Stan!  The most interesting thing about the post is that most of these questions are questions actively being researched by academics (many papers on these and other KM topics are being presented in my Track: Knowledge, Innovation, and Entrepreneurial Systems, at the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, HICSS).  What is most interesting is that I have seen many posts that seem to indicate academics are not doing relevant KM research.  My proof that they are are the questions below: I have either published papers in my journal, International Journal of Knowledge Management, or my track at HICSS, or have actually done the research on all but maybe #9 below.  I would even say that many of Randahir's post on new ways of thinking on KM have already been or are being addressed by academics.  My final point, is that practitioners and academics need to have stronger ties.  I offer practitioners opportunities to publish through my Reports from the Field minitrack at HICSS with fast track publishing to IJKM but am not getting much practitioner response.

Practitioners: the ball is in your court, academics are doing the relevant research, you're not reading it and you're not participating much in opportunities to work with academics.....murray jennex


-----Original Message-----
From: stangarfield@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...>
To: sikmleaders <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Mon, Jan 7, 2019 6:59 am
Subject: [sikmleaders] Re: Looking for project ideas in the field of knowledge management



Here are 10 suggestions:
  1. What are effective ways to get people to overcome their reluctance to ask questions openly?
  2. What are effective ways to motivate people to share and reuse knowledge, including formal goals, recognition, rewards, and gamification?
  3. What are effective ways to help people move from using email for everything to using it for what it does best, and using other tools for what they do best?
  4. How can the glut of information flow be managed more effectively so that people can pay attention to the things that matter the most and not be distracted by other noise?
  5. How can artificial intelligence and cognitive computing be effectively used to significatnly advance knowledge management in ways that go beyond simple applications such as speech interfaces and chat bots?
  6. Define a set of metrics that have been used effectively to actively monitor and improve KM programs and enterprise collaboration
  7. Prove or debunk the 90-9-1 rule of thumb for participation and community engagement
  8. Prove or debunk the value of maturity models for knowledge management, enterprise collaboration, and related areas
  9. Prove or debunk the validity of computing the return on investment (ROI) of knowledge management and enterprise collaboration
  10. Prove or debunk the value of best practice replication and lessons learned databases