1. What is Knowledge Management? and why we should care Mr. Art Schlussel, CKM, CDIA, ECMs November 18, 2009 By: Octium International
2. Observation “ The only irreplaceable capital an organization possesses is the knowledge and ability of its people. The productivity of that capital depends on how effectively people share their competence with those who can use it.” Andrew Carnegie
9. What IS Knowledge Management? Actions & Programs Designed to Mobilize the Organization’s Intellectual Capital in order to Improve Organizational Effectiveness KM is about ACTION
12. A Real Life Example of Data Becoming Knowledge Data: Six IEDs exploded Information: “ In the last eight hours, six IEDs have been discovered around Samarra”. Knowledge : “The last time there was increased enemy activity like this, enemy forces were consolidating for a possible attack to recapture key towns.”
15. KM Definitions Knowledge Management is the art of creating, organizing, applying, and transferring knowledge to facilitate situational understanding and decision making. Knowledge management supports improving organizational learning, innovation, and performance. Knowledge management processes ensure that knowledge products and services are relevant, accurate, timely, and useable to commanders and decision makers. FM 3-0, Operations, Section 7-53, 27 February 2008 = FM 6-01.1 Knowledge Management Section, 1-3. Aug 08 First Army KM Doctrine Knowledge management is a discipline that promotes an integrated approach to identifying, retrieving, evaluating, and sharing an enterprise’s tacit and explicit knowledge assets to meet mission objectives. The objective of the principles is to connect those who know with those who need to know (know-why, know-what, know-who, and know-how) by leveraging knowledge transfers from one-to-many across the Global Army Enterprise. Army Knowledge Management Principles, by Dr. Robert Neilson, signed by Army Secretary Pete Geren and Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey, Jul 2008
16. KM Definitions (continued) Conscious strategy of getting the right knowledge to the right people at the right time and helping people share and put information into action in ways that strive to improve organizational performance.” Carla O’Dell and C. Jackson Grayson, If Only We Knew What We Know, 1998, p.6 Conscious strategy of putting both tacit and explicit knowledge into action by creating context, infrastructure, and learning cycles that enable people to find and use the collective knowledge of the enterprise.” Carla O’Dell, Susan Elliott, and Cindy Hubert, Knowledge Management: A Guide for Your Journey to Best-Practice Processes , APQC, 2000, p.1) Knowledge Management (KM) is the systematic processes by which knowledge needed for an organization to succeed is created, captured, shared and leveraged. Melissie Rumizen,The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Knowledge Management, 2002 KM is a discipline that promotes an integrated approach to identifying, retrieving, evaluating, and sharing an enterprise’s tacit and explicit knowledge assets to meet mission objectives. Art’s current favorite definition
19. Experience & Expertise Cartoon by Danny Shanahan, the New Yorker, Sept. 2002 “ I’ve never really stormed a castle, but I’ve taken a bunch of siege management courses.”
21. A Typical “Knowledge Manager” Who Uses Both Expertise and Experience Corporal “Radar” O'Reilly - M*A*S*H TV Series
24. 4 Typical KM Challenges Know Don’t Know Know Don’t Know Knowledge That You Know You Have Somewhere, But Can’t Find (Explicit Knowledge) Knowledge that You Don’t Know You Have (Tacit Knowledge) Knowledge that You Know You Don’t Have (Known Gaps) Knowledge That You Don’t Know You Don’t Have (SURPRISES!)
Why should organizations invest in Knowledge Management.
Often data and information are tossed around when talking about knowledge. It is important to understand the differences Data are unprocessed signals communicated between any nodes in an information system or sensings from the environment detected by a collector of any kind (human, mechanical, or electronic) (FM 6-0). Data can be quantified, stored, and organized in files and databases; however, data only becomes useful when processed into information. Information is data that have been processed to provide further meaning (FM 6-0). Processing places data within a context that gives it meaning and value. Like data, information can be quantified, stored, and organized; however, information alone rarely provides a sound basis for deciding and acting. Good decisions and effective actions require knowledge. Knowledge, in this context, is information that has been analyzed to provide meaning or value or evaluated as to implications for the operation. Knowledge is meaningfully structured and based on experience. Some is usable as the basis for achieving understanding and making decisions. Other knowledge forms the background against which commanders make those decisions. This table shows a simple example of data becoming knowledge.
There are numerous KM definitions, but there is not an agreed upon definition. Here are the first published Army Definitions from Army Knowledge Management Principles, by Dr. Bob Neilson - signed by Army Secretary Pete Geren and Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey, Jul 2008 and FM 3-0, Operations, Section 7-53, 27 February 2008 and FM 6-01.1 Knowledge Management Section, 1-3. Aug 08
KM as a discipline was only introduced a little mover 20 years ago. KM first was introduced in 1986 by Karl-Erik Sveiby and Karl Wiig. KM didn’t start to pick up momentum until 1998.
KM comprises three major components: This is a Holistic Approach of KM. • People— People are the most important element of KM. those inside and outside the organization who create, organize, apply, and transfer knowledge, and the leaders who act on that knowledge. • Processes—the methods of creating, organizing, applying, and transferring knowledge. • Technology—information systems used to put knowledge products and services into organized frameworks. Relatively new fourth component is Content
Economists call the phenomenon of assets that increase in value when shared “network externality.” Of course, sharing can diminish the value of an asset under certain circumstances– that’s why we have laws to protect intellectual property. But within broad limits, an organization’s knowledge stock will go up if it is cultivated through sharing. Think of the Internet– it costs almost nothing to add another node, but adding such a node increases the opportunities for profitability. For that matter, think of paper money– as any economist will tell you, it basically has value because people think it has value and act accordingly. The more people who think so, the more who accept it, the more value it has. THE KEY IS TO GET THE ORGANIZATION TO SEE EFFECTIVE KM AS PROMOTING FLOWS, NOT STOCKS, OF KNOWLEDGE . TEACHING Q (ONE THAT WILL COME UP AGAIN): WHAT KIND OF REAL-WORLD INCENTIVES FOR INFO SHARE WILL WORK IN YOUR ORGANIZATION?
KM has gotten a bad wrap over the years. Most people really don’t understand what KM is.
People often hoard knowledge – if they share it, they won’t be in control. Someone else will get the glory/promotion.
Failure to share knowledge incurs costs. During calm times in office environments these costs are usually expressed in lost efficiency and person hours or dollars. In high-pressure environments such as hospitals and battlefields, the costs can be measured in casualties and human lives. Dangerous Knowledge Gaps Historically, failure to share knowledge has resulted in disasters. Amazingly, each of the following could have been averted completely with “a word to the wise” -- knowledge shared at the right time, by the right person. The sinking of the Titanic: the location of the iceberg was spiked in the ship’s telegraph office. Crash of the Space Shuttle Challenger: the Challenger engineers knew the dangers of freezing the o-ring that failed. 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon: prior to 9/11 the FBI was investigating foreign students at flight schools learning to fly, but not land, large commercial jet planes. Lee H. Hamilton, Former Vice Chair of the 9/11 Commission, made this statement to Congress on November 8, 2005: Poor information sharing was the single greatest failure of our government in the lead-up to the 9/11 attacks. The failure to share information adequately, within and across federal agencies, and from federal agencies to state and local authorities, was a significant contributing factor to our government’s missteps in understanding and responding to the growing threat of al Qaeda in the years before the 9/11 attacks. There were several missed opportunities to disrupt the 9/11 plot. Most of them involved the failure to share information. The right information was available; it just wasn’t shared . That famous World War II slogan, “Loose Lips Sink Ships” is true: careless spilling of intelligence is a dangerous thing. But it’s equally true that knowledge and information – properly exchanged – can save lives. So, yes, catastrophic disasters have occurred because of failure to share information. In addition, these stories are quietly echoed millions of times per day in all sorts of work environments. Inefficiency How much time do knowledge workers and managers spend trying to find information that is somewhere “out there?” Estimates vary, but a ballpark figure is that 10% of the workday is spent in attempting to find information necessary to do the job. Often searching for information is a matter of finding a person who knows something. This is a common problem, caused by the lack of internal understanding of “who knows what.” The cost of knowledge inefficiency is increased when we factor in work duplication, or “reinventing the wheel.” This occurs when agencies re-do work that has been done elsewhere because they are unaware of or cannot find work product from the earlier project.
Less than 100 B2 Pilots in the entire Air Force. The first crash of an Air Force B2 stealth bomber occurred in Guam on 23 February 2008. Both pilots ejected safely just after the left wing made contact with the ground. Investigators laid the cause of the crash on moisture in sensors and estimated the loss of the aircraft at $1.4 billion. The crash probably could have been avoided if knowledge of a technique to evaporate the moisture had been disseminated throughout the B-2 program, according to the head of the investigation board. Learned by some crews two years earlier, the technique essentially heats the sensors and evaporates any moisture before data calibrations. &quot;This technique was never formalized in a technical order change or captured in 'lessons learned' reports. Only some pilots and some maintenance technicians knew of the suggestion. The report concluded, &quot;The human factor of communicating critical information was a contributing factor to this mishap.&quot; Feb 2008
In the early days of 2004 when the insurgency was heating up, enemies of the coalition used every trick they could think of to kill or main our troops thinking we would beat a hasty retreat if we suffered too many casualties. Al Quada and the insurgents watch us closely and learned our patterns and habits. One pattern they noticed was in northern Baghdad the US and coalition forces were tearing down Saddam Hussein and anti American posters with regularity. So in one neighborhood the insurgents started removing bricks from the wall behind the posters and placing explosives with a trip wire across the back of the poster. Initially this tactic had some success and more than one US soldier was killed or lost an arm. The word of success quickly spread among the insurgents and the tactic was employed in other areas. Yet after those initial successes this tactic had little effect thanks largely to the use of a distributed unit Network forum called CAVNET (a web based knowledge network designed for rapid dissemination of lessons and Best Practices). After a patrol suffering casualties from the tactic debriefed his leadership the new enemy tactic and a Best Practice solution was agreed upon at the BCT level (within hours) the word of this new tactic and Best Practice was distributed via CAVNET before the day ended. Each morning Soldiers of 1-41 Infantry, an Arkansas National Guard unit attached to 1 CD and located in the south west portion of Baghdad would check CAVNET for changes to enemy tactics and new Best Practices. This morning was no exception. CPT Wilson and his patrol leaders scanned through the site for the new entries discussing each as they went, making notes on their patrol notebooks. When they rejoined their men they discussed the new enemy tactics and decided how they would deal with such situations as they prepared and rehearsed their daily patrol. It was not until over a week later when one of CPT Wilson’s patrols encountered a new poster that a new soldier walked up to and began to tear it down when others in the team shouted “freeze”. The Patrol leader dispatched the engineer sergeant to check out the poster and sure enough, an explosive was lodged in a area of missing wall. CPT Wilson and his leaders saved soldiers lives that day because he had internalized knowledge learned by others experience, discussed in the online Forum CAVNET and then combined this new knowledge with other knowledge, lesson learned and experiences through local conversations as they prepared for patrols. They then disseminated and deliberately practiced this new knowledge until it was embodied in their troopers. This is only one of the examples where we have direct evidence of how the rapid transfer of knowledge in time for the next patrol has had an enormous impact of lives and the missions. MG Pete Chiarelli, the Division Commander for 1CD at the time attributes CAVNET and other similar professional forums linking practitioners in and out of combat to saving over 500 lives just during his divisions tour of duty.