A Framework for Knowledge Transfer

Today I had an interesting exchange in the 'Knowledge Managers' group on LinkedIn. I enjoy reviewing questions posed by the various groups I participate in on LinkedIn but found this one quite interesting. www.linkedin.com
The subject was on the transfer of tacit knowledge and goodness knows I have a few opinions about that.

I posted that frameworks help organize the deeply held knowledge to be transferred from experts, to help make the knowledge applicable and actionable. Again I thought of the complexities of knowledge and the importance of organizing what has been accumulated over years and years of experiences, decisions, missteps and successes. We do struggle to identify what needs to be transferred and what does not. Not only do we need a framework to organize but we need to discern in some objective way, which areas of knowledge should be the focus to apply the framework on. Let's start there.

Unique, relevant and critical are the three terms I use to begin to determine if what someone knows needs to be transferred to the successor or the organization. Why? Because if many people hold the knowledge, is it necessary to transfer? No. It's a commodity.  What if it is unique but not relevant for the future? The expert may know something fascinating about the history or background of the product or company, and that knowledge might appeal to the KM practioner. But does it have an impact, will it matter in the future? Much of the historical knowledge held will matter, it may well provide context behind decisions, structures, processes. But not all of it is relevant and we must discern (with verification) if it is relevant. And then there is the issue of what I call critical. Is this knowledge crucial? One way to consider this is to imagine what might change if the knowledge is lost. Will things slow down, will quality fail, will products be more difficult to produce? Will relationships falter?

Are these criteria for discernment scientific? No. But do they work? My 16 years of experience says yes. I have applied these criteria in many situations and, like the framework, they have yet to fail me. It is less about the criteria being perfect and more that they are practical. Applicable. They are relevant.

Do You Have Time for Google Realtime

Seems everyday tools, gadgets or widgets are popping up to help us with our intense online information overload...often just to keep us aware of the information we are overloaded with.

I wondered if it would be the same with Google Realtime. I was curious to learn if continual updates of online info on my topics of interest would be useful to me or simply remind me of all of the information I did not have time to wade through.

http://www.google.com/landing/realtime/

I choose as my topic Knowledge Transfer. To those of you who might raise an eyebrow and say...hmm, how about painting or cheesemaking for a change, I do have other interests. I wanted to find out if my work could be enhanced by online listings. So, I chose my topic and set a daily alert for myself.

So far, the jury on the question of information overload is out, but the tool is quite fun and probably useful, especially for anyone who spends a lot of time searching or surfing.

Mostly, I use it to quickly view what's being said, to spark new thought, to build on what I am working on or thinking about. It's still about context and connection for me most of the time, but if I want quickly take a pulse on what's up out there...this tool is worth the small amount of effort required.

The short video on Google Realtime's homepage is worth the time to quickly understand what is available.

Just the Facts, Nothing But the Facts

As mentioned, I've been working to transfer my knowledge about knowledge transfer to new colleagues. To do this, I'm using my own processes.

My first question to myself? What about what I know is unique, relevant and critical. Those are the three magic terms that help me separate the knowledge which MUST be transferred from all of the other areas of knowledge (Abba lyrics perhaps?) which we hold and do not need to transfer. Some readers may argue that Songs like SOS must be kept alive. True, but not by me. That knowledge is not unique to me-- it's held by many others who can retrieve it much faster (and more accurately) then I. It is also not critical (my business is much more likely to survive and thrive if I do not sing to my clients) nor relevant.

My experiences and stories however are.

This is not meant to be about ego, but about sharing what I am learning, or I should say what I am re-learning.

Often when we are transferring knowledge to others, we believe the most important areas to focus on are the factual aspects or the technical information. Yes, the facts are critical but without context, without an understanding of how the knowledge was applied, the situation it was used in, the influencers and intended outcomes, there is less relevance.

More so, the knowledge will not be retained and will be tough to reuse.

Stories put things into perspective and context. Stories are how we transfer behaviors and beliefs. Stories allow us to provide the whole picture. And, stories are what we remember.

I have a lot of stories. As I transfer knowledge about knowledge transfer, I am able to say why I did what I did, what else I considered, what I intended as the outcome, what the actual outcome was and what I learned from that. I can talk about things that worked beautifully and things that did not, and what I would now do differently. Like the experts with whom I often work, I am finding the telling of stories rewarding as I remember the details, the people, the work.

Stories give us a sense of our own growth and learning, just as they provide context for the listener.

Next time you are transferring knowledge and you want to go to the facts, keep in mind that providing the richness and color of the surrounding stories will make those facts come to life for the learner.