LWM Technology Services
Home Page
SUBSCRIBE TO NEWSLETTER
SEND
COMMENTS/QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS TOPIC
LWM
Technology Services of Harvard, Mass., publishes and distributes this bimonthly
newsletter by e-mail to individuals and organizations having an interest in any
aspect of Knowledge Management processes. Each issue presents a mini-report on
a KM topic and links to interesting reading on the featured topic.
November, 2002
Key Elements of a Knowledge Architecture
Include More Than IT
While IT
professionals are the most likely to end up with responsibility for design of
the organization's knowledge architecture, they may be neglecting elements that
are outside of the automation arena. Job postings for knowledge management
system architecture specialties show requirements for programming and computer
technology expertise with little or no emphasis on knowledge resource
management expertise. By underscoring that there are vital areas lying outside
the scope of IT or computer science training, and examining the required
expertise, we can begin to define how it should be incorporated into KM
architecture design and process implementation. There is evidence that
organizational leaders have a belief that they should be implementing a
knowledge management system, but it is not happening in many institutions. This
may simply be a matter of who is doing the planning and attempting the
execution.
A survey of
current job openings for knowledge management professionals to do "systems
analysis, system design, development…," reveals a lot about how
organizations think about the personnel they want to hire, and what their
skills and competencies might be. Indirectly, these notices also convey a
faulty sense of what a knowledge management system really is, by emphasizing a
network of hardware and software components designed to capture information and
convert it into knowledge.
Take for
example the following:
In the same
job descriptions there were required additionally, strong written and verbal
communications skills, documentation experience, ability to chart strategies,
broad business perspectives, high service orientation, ability to translate
technology for business audiences. Besides the fact that these skills are
difficult to find in combination with the requisite technical experience, it is
unrealistic in most any organization to expect that employees who are writing
Java code or building Oracle applications will also be writing documentation,
charting KM strategies, and making management level presentations. It is
realistic to seek project leaders who have familiarity and conversance in
specific technologies, while being able leaders, communicators, and
strategists. But these job openings say more about approaches that are destined
to fail, than about what they want to achieve.
First, when
a position has been created to design, establish plans, strategize
infrastructure and then gives very specific product knowledge requirements, we
understand that decisions have already been made that may or may not be
advisable. A new employee expecting to systematically research, analyze, plan
and design a system may find that technological choices already in place
severely constrain new and innovative designs.
Second, by
omitting some rather obvious competencies, the project is likely to be all
about technology products, missing completely the human skills and expertise
required to build and implement the best KM processes. By placing expectation
on a technologist who has confidence in the ill-defined field of "content
management" to carry him/her through to a good solution, the KM plan will
fail. Technologists should not be making choices about what content will reside
in the system; furthermore, there is significant work to be done by others in
establishing those choices before any technology is selected or deployed.
The jobs one
must first staff to ramp up a KM project involve decision-making about the
content of the databases, and data repositories, and design of the structures
that will define where the data originated, who its intended users are, and how
it will be classified and categorized. The competencies and expertise needed
for this type of architectural judgment on the data side is precisely what
moves content from disjointed documents, memos and reports into the realm of
the knowledge base. The content then has potential to be the foundation of a
true knowledge architecture. There is no requirement for these designers and
decision makers to have a knowledge of Oracle, Visual Basic, or MS-SQL Server.
There is however, a need for strong investigative and analytical skills,
knowledge of the industry in the context of the organization being served, and,
most important, a deep understanding of organizational culture.
Let's take
each of these skill sets and examine why it is needed, then formulate the ideal
composite knowledge architect.
INVESTIGATIVE
AND ANALYTICAL SKILLS
Designing
and implementing a knowledge architecture first requires a complete and
comprehensive inventory of organizational knowledge. It takes special expertise
to conduct the inventory or audit. Knowing the forms of knowledge assets and
resources to seek, where they are likely to be found and how to find them
requires high quality communication skills and a deep understanding of
organizational behaviors and structures. By identifying key people in the
organization and asking them the right questions, the investigator is likely to
build a more comprehensive inventory of knowledge for consideration, than a
computer scientist.
Being able
to use the gathered information effectively means also having analytical
skills. Any investigation is likely to be iterative in nature to achieve depth
in scope. As the investigation proceeds, analysis of facts found and
information gathered must begin. This will undoubtedly reveal the need for
further investigation. Take for example a simple audit in which it is revealed
that a defense contractor has a technical documents repository for government
documents, which will form some of the content for the knowledge base. As
auditors analyze materials and make decisions about document storage and
access, they find no technical reports produced internally. This leads to
further investigation to discover who and what controls that material. And so,
the inventory of potential content resources continues. Perhaps you are
beginning to realize how foolish it would be to have your Java expert
conducting this research.
INDUSTRY
EXPERTISE AND UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL MANDATES
Each
industry has its own language, its own methods of reporting and disseminating
information. Government regulations pervade some industries; academic
institutions have significant influence on others. These differences should be
understood by the information auditor, whether an outside consultant or
internal person. At the outset, a thorough review of the organization chart
will help the investigator to understand the potential connections among
various business units and how information might already be flowing and where
knowledge flow paths can or should exist.
Of
particular importance is the need for a clear understanding of who is driving
the KM initiative at the highest level, and what the expectations are. Strive
to assure that there is a conviction by top management that improved KM is an
organizational necessity. If it is possible to interview top management and
probe for their perspectives, beliefs and expectations, it must be done. A good
investigator will take the opportunity to provide insight into the benefits
that should come from a well-executed and well-supported plan. It is this
individual who can make the business case and should have the ability to do it
effectively.
UNDERSTANDING
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
Understanding
an organization's culture has two benefits. It will help the knowledge auditor
find content and place it into the appropriate context. It will also help the
architect clearly articulate design elements of database building, retrieval
and knowledge process flow that will or will not work. This is where a bias
toward a particular technology can genuinely interfere. Having an information
specialist who can relate and communicate to the human factors and cultural
workings of the organization is vital.
THE
ARCHITECTURE SCHEME AND TEAM
Elsewhere
in LWM Technology writings, we emphasize that Knowledge Management is a process
not a piece of technology or series of technological products. When an
organization commits itself to KM for organizational gain and benefit, as
already stated, there must be a solid conviction at the top that it will bring
a result. Management should have a target result in mind, ideally a series of
results or outcomes. The other aspect of a KM initiative is that it will not
have an end - it is no different than implementing a manufacturing operation.
It might change but it isn't expected to finish.
To
realistically meet management goals a team approach must be contemplated; it
must also evolve. Until the scope of the defining knowledge content is
discovered, analyzed and described, it is premature to begin putting
technologies into place. The first worker on the project must be a leader who
will oversee everything from early investigation to final implementation. We
will call this person the Knowledge Architect to whom we will assign the
following requisite competencies:
SUMMARY
Knowledge architecture is a human resources issue rather than a technological
problem. Even the simplest business models and small organizations can benefit
from good KM practices through the insights, competencies, and planning of a
good knowledge architect. With strong buy-in from top management and the
corporate will to make KM fundamental to corporate culture, the IT component
will become an appropriate complementary partner in building a successful
process. - Lynda W. Moulton ©2002 LWM Technology
Services
Related Readings of Interest
Adams,
Katherine. Peak performance; CKOs contribute to organizational success
through effective knowledge leadership. Intelligent KM
10/24/2001 3p. http://www.intelligentkm.com/011024/416feat1_1.shtml
Davenport,
Thomas, H. Working Knowledge: how organizations manage what they know,
by Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School, Boston.
2000. 199p.
Delic, Kemal
A. Serving Knowledge: Seven insights about knowledge management in the IT
service industry. Intelligent KM 08/12/2002 2p. http://www.intelligentkm.com/020812/513feat1_2.shtml
Genusa,
Angela. RX for learning; why Tufts' health sciences database earns honors.
CIO, 02/01/2001. 6p. http://www.cio.com/archive/020101/tufts.html
Srikantaiah,
T. Kanti, ed. Knowledge management for the information professional/for
ASIS by edited by T. Kanti Srikantaiah and Michael E.D. Koenig. Information
Today, 2000. 598p.
Background and issues, creating a culture of learning and knowledge sharing in
the organization, tools, application and strategy. A substantive work on all
the areas of knowledge management with consideration given to the roles of
libraries in the field.