What does standing in curiosity have to do with knowledge transfer?

'Standing in curiosity' is a term I use often, especially when working with clients around knowledge transfer.  Let me explain first what I mean when I use that term and then why that is a critical component to knowledge transfer.

First, let’s talk about curiosity.  To me, the word invokes a sense of wonder, of non-judgmental exploration, of a mind open to new ideas, of being willing to not know while wanting to learn.  Curiosity means that you do not need to think you know everything, instead that you would like to find out more, to see new things and that you are open to possibilities.

Being curious then means that you are ready and willing to learn and explore and that your mind is open to new possibilities. What an incredible place from what to learn and gain knowledge.

Why do I say that we need to stand in curiosity? I intentionally use the word ‘stand’ to evoke the sensation that your body is involved, not just your mind. I use the word to create imagery that lets you feel present, that curiosity is all around you, that you are standing IN it. Now not only is your mind open, but your somatic self, your entire self, is also involved.  Standing in curiosity means you are as open as you can be to learning.

Now why is that so critical to knowledge transfer?

Let’s think about what is happening when we are transferring knowledge. First, there is the holder of the knowledge with their experiences, their background, with years of building up their expertise from all of the accumulated decisions, actions and observations. Let’s call them the expert.

The learner is often someone with their own experience in the area, their own background and years of learning—it does not matter if that learner is young or older, they bring their own level of understanding to the experience.
It could be very possible for the learner then to judge what they are hearing or learning or observing from the expert through their previous experience BEFORE they are able to try it out, to ponder it, to assimilate it.  The learner may dismiss new ideas or ideas they might build upon because they are not open or curious but rather letting their own experience close their mind to the possibility that there is more to learn from what is being transferred.  They may say to themselves “that’s not how it really works” or “I don’t do it that way” or “I’ll let them talk but I know better”.

A learner who stands in curiosity does not take everything that is being told them or transferred to them as absolute or true without question. Instead they are listening, pondering, finding out how it all works together and listening to the whole story, the context, the background and rationale.  They are turning it all over in their mind and taking out what works for them, what the nuggets are to build upon, adding to their own repertoire and understanding.  They are open to the possibility that there is something new, some novel approach or idea, some helpful background for them in what they are learning.

For the expert, having a curious learner makes sharing knowledge much more fun, more of a give and take, a more engaging experience.  The quality of the experience can be enhanced and what’s more, the outcome can be a shared learning, a bigger aha.
Standing in curiosity takes nothing more than an attitude shift, costs nothing to the learner and creates an experience more valuable for expert, learner and the organization

Outsourcing, Knowledge and Competitive Advantage

Outsourcing figures vary widely as you review conflicting media reports. And in the last few months the number of stories of companies now…ok, wait for it…in-shoring, is growing. What does that mean? They have taken the work done via off-shore outsourcing back to the U.S.

Yes, this seems confusing but was it that hard to spot the trend upcoming? Companies under tough economic pressures decided it was more profitable to use resources outside of the U.S. to build products, service customers, even to create new ideas. And they created strategies to move work from the U.S. to locations with lower costs, like India or China. That trend has not stopped, but it is shifting. Now the work is less profitable off-shore as wages rise in step with the increased labor demand, and companies are feeling the effects of less-than-satisfied customers.

One of the difficulties in moving work was that to retain excellence, they also had to move deeply-held organizational knowledge. Even those companies not good at identifying and transferring knowledge in one country now needed to transfer very critical knowledge (for example, how to speak with and service their customers) to another country with a different culture, language and traditions.

Were the outsourcing companies always successful at training and sharing knowledge with their new international colleagues? No. We all have examples of miscommunications and understanding when asking how to fix a technical issue or work out a charge on a credit card. Nonetheless, as the new colleagues gained experience, they began also to gain their own critical knowledge, to hear what the customers thought or wanted, and to therefore gather business
- critical learning.

We lacked in creating effective processes for sharing the deep nuances of the products, the customers or the culture with the new outsourcing partners. But we also lacked in creating processes to collect their learning and bring it back to the heart of the organization.  Companies were increasingly out of touch with the front line of what was happening with customers and products.  That front line often creates competitive advantage by allowing companies to hear their customers wants, needs, concerns and quickly address them, beating out slower moving competitors.

In short, all of the out-sourcing, off shoring, in-sourcing, on-shoring, in-shoring has simply taxed our already less than stellar skills at transferring knowledge. Few companies do this very well, and the additional burden of needing to quickly move the knowledge already not flowing in the organizational caused less than adequate processes to break down.

What is the learning? That the knowledge held by the companies about its products, processes, customers, supply chain, distribution channels—all of that knowledge is key to profitability and sustained success. Treat knowledge like the asset it is. Tend to it, share it wisely but share it well. And never underestimate the power of a well-informed, experienced employee.

The Leader As Role Model for KM

I've been working in the field of Knowledge Management for a long time. I started doing this work back when PCs were not on every desk and hand held devices were mobile telephones as big as a good sized brick.

There are a few things about managing knowledge, or work in general, that do not change. Let me give you a few:

• Knowledge Management takes discipline
• Knowledge Management is ever evolving as the organization evolves and is never completely done
• Leadership must role model the behaviors they wish others to follow

One of the truths about this work is that no matter what you say to your employees or how often you say it, they will do as they see you, the leadership, do.

If you tell them how critical it is to manage knowledge, to share, to document and do not, as a leader or leadership team, share and document your own knowledge, the behavior for them will not stick. If you do not actively participate in endeavors you tell others are critical, the message is not only confusing, but also demotivating for the employees and will have an opposite effect.

It is common sense, really. You look to your leaders to lead, to show the way, to be what is aspired to, and to be the walking role model of what the organization stands for.

When employees can witness leaders not sharing knowledge with their peers, missing meetings, showing up late, or as I saw in a meeting today --falling asleep, the message is clear. Leaders might tell you to do something, to participate,but if they do not believe it, everyone loses.

Leaders who are not authentic are giving very loud messages to their employees, peers and vendors. Trust becomes a major issue. They hurt the organization and themselves.

Now instead, consider the leader who is openly curious, interested and actively participates in the very things they say are critical. They give honest, respectful feedback with the visible intent to improve the work or the endeavor. Their messages are always clear and they stand up for what they believe to be important. They show that knowledge is an asset to be built, respected, re-applied and the people who hold or share that knowledge are to be respected as well.

When leadership work the knowledge management practices they espouse, dialogue openly about the opportunities and the challenges they experience in managing knowledge, participate in the projects, meetings, and the activities required to get the KM ball rolling, the impact is astounding. Leadership role modeling can create a step change in the culture, the behaviors and the abilities to manage knowledge. There is no greater jumpstart to any change initiative then a proactive, involved, authentic leader. That truth will never change.

That type of leadership is what is needed to have knowledge management stick. It is the type of leadership that a great organization requires for all they do. They are not defensive about any one group or tool or project but role model openness, active listening, and learning from those around them. They think their job is about continually improving because they think the company is about continual learning.

There is no consultant who can replace the value and the impact of an authentic, engaged leader willing to role model KM and the behaviors needed to do that.

Now be honest, are you really working globally?

Many, actually nearly all, of the clients that I work with have locations in more than one country. Notice that I did not say that nearly all of my clients are global. To me, there is a huge difference.

Companies locate in various countries for many reasons: merger, economics of manufacturing, tax laws, customer reach, new market expansion, the list goes on.

Working across locations does not necessarily mean they are skilled at working globally.

Companies working effectively on a global basis are dealing head-on with the challenges of cross-cultural communications, time zone issues, language barriers, and the need to collaborate across all types of boundaries. There is much more to working globally then simply having multiple international locations.

I remember these same topics discussed in boardrooms in the mid 90’s, when expansion was the name of the game and money flowed freely. We may have missed some valuable opportunities to create the processes, cultural understanding and infrastructure that would have facilitated global success. Perhaps we were running too fast after the short-term opportunities and forgetting the long-term needs and benefits. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

The need to work effectively globally will not go away, but will instead be enhanced as US-based companies put even greater emphasis on emerging markets. It may suddenly become apparent to those working in the US that they are the minority in their organizations and most of their colleagues are located across an ocean or at least across a border. I believe that preparation now will be the key to competitive advantage in the future. How will you communicate and share critical learning in lightning speed across geographic and cultural gaps? How will you ensure that everyone in the organization, no matter the location, is as fast, bright, well prepared, and knowledgeable as your best people? There is no time like the present to begin that journey. Or, do we want to continue to work in multiple international locations? Working globally makes a great deal more business sense.

Sustainable Knowledge: A Story

Let me tell you a story. A cautionary tale, actually. Once upon a time there was a Knowledge Management Consulting group doing some client work in a terrific, intelligent, innovative organization. The objectives were clear-- help the organization learn how to identify, transfer, reuse and develop new knowledge, innovation, ideas and learning. However, no one had set the objective for sustainability. (And there, my friends, lies the caution).

Along the journey, many roadblocks were met and most, through the hard work and dedication of the team, were handled. Pilot projects were identified, processes put in place, employees and sponsors alike understood what was involved, the business benefits and the need to transfer experiences, insights and expertise. People were willing and certainly the organization and those who worked there held a great deal of critical knowledge.

As the work continued, it became more clear that though the innovation and the experiential part of knowledge transfer was interesting, even intriguing to the organization, what was not so interesting was the work it takes to sustain and continue to keep the knowledge alive and refreshed. The creation and  implementation of a sustainability plan-- creating and editing the documentation or other vehicles to capture knowledge, keeping the Wiki's up to date, ensuring videos were edited and, most difficult, creating the architecture plan for where the various pieces and types of knowledge would live-- was not the fun part for these intelligent, fast paced learners. Remembering to communicate that new content, in whatever form, was available seemed to be a bother rather than a show of pride. They had done the work to identify and transfer, but capture and compilation, along with labeling and meta data creation, was not where they wanted to spend time.

And so, eventually the good work the team had done was lost in and amongst the other data stored in various document management systems, in SharePoint sites and shared drives. Sometimes it even languished on hard drives.

The Knowledge Management consultant moved on to a new role elsewhere. But the organization's knowledge transfer was not sustained. There had been a great deal of work, even some culture change, but the next generation of employees were still left to spend their valuable time searching, sometimes in vain, to find the internal knowledge around their projects. Most simply stopped trying and used the external web to find information rather than reuse the hard won, expensive, time consuming and critical internal intellectual capital.

The moral of the story: Do not start what you can not sustain. Discipline is a GOOD thing. If an organization is not disciplined about their documentation, they will not be disciplined in the long run about their tacit knowledge. Start with the end in mind. And make sure everyone is willing and able to stick through the long term work of sustainable knowledge transfer. It might not look as sexy as the knowledge gathering, but the end game is much, much more valuable.

Knowledge Transfer for the sake of what?

Businesses large and small are talking about Knowledge Transfer. However, as some twittering types have stated lately, there are those who loudly state that Knowledge Transfer sounds like filling a bucket, not sparking new ideas. Fair enough. The term may be less than accurate. Though  the discussions did not involve me, I will state that in my view it is a term I embrace and will gladly use. It is not the only term I employ. It depends on the work.

The context free debate surprised me however. 140 characters does not give much, if any, space to provide contextual understanding. Yet, I see many folks can be up in arms about the term employed. In 140 characters. No one asked any questions about intention for the term.

 We have to be clear this argument is not new nor is it going away anytime soon. I would rather we all stand in curiosity rather than spend energy debating the terminology. As with many complex discussions, it started some time ago, stems from many sources and  from not being clear on what we wanted to achieve.

It has never been easy for practitioners to accurately name the activities around any type of Knowledge Management. In the early 90's (and yes, I'm dating myself here) many of us had no concept of the term Knowledge Management. We were, in fact, grappling with information overload which was the outcome of the acceptance and excitement around new uses for computing (of all types), new ways of using media....more information then we knew how to effectively or efficiently leverage. The consulting industry, bolstered by forecasts from Gartner and others, decided Knowledge Management was the next big wave and jumped in. However that resulted (and still does I'm afraid) in the confusion around the definition of knowledge management. Was it process, people, document management, knowledge management, information management, information architecture, content management, ERP systems, Decision Support, Business Intelligence...  20 years later that same discussion lingers.

Frankly, I am tired of that same question. I would rather just get on with it and that is what we and others have done.

Knowledge Transfer is the same debate. 

To me and to my firm, purpose is key. We continually ask: For the sake of what?
That is and should be the major over riding question for all of our work, and Knowledge Transfer by any name is no different. If you answer for the sake of what, you will get to the definition of the work be able to ascertain if the work is being done most effectively to reach your goals.

Knowledge Transfer is often more accurate than Knowledge Management, for the work that we do.

Knowledge transfer includes, in my view, the exchange of knowledge. It is not a one way dump of insights and tidbits. The transfer of knowledge can and does happen from the expert, the learner, external influences...whatever is appropriate.

Knowledge Exchange is the term we employed when working with an American firm divesting their operations in the Netherlands. We taught those involved from all locations to work with respect and care, and consider what they were trying to achieve, as well as consider those who benefited from the knowledge transfer---the customers and clients. Specifically as this was in the Medical Device industry, it was to be the patients who benefited. So we ensured the Knowledge Transfer was a Knowledge Exchange, named it that, and were very clear about  'for the sake of what'. The results were excellent and even in the midst of a location shutting down, everyone acted with respect and care and the knowledge was exchanged effeciently, effectively and completely.

At other times however, Knowledge Transfer is dialogue, sometimes during a community of practice, sometimes during a lessons learned session, an active learning session, a peer to peer review....the list goes on. We tell stories, we do case studies and all the time we are transferring knowledge.

Before we jump on each others' language and terms, can we not simply ask what the intended result is, what the for the sake of what is, and understand the terms may not be absolutely correct. The intention is what matters. The words are powerful and critical, but perhaps we can also give each other a bit of a break, and get on with it. Let's just do good work, together, We all have much to gain from learning together.

Instead of debating terms, let's ask each other what the result of the work was, and was it valuable to the client. Now there is a debate worth having!

How fast can a leader learn?

90 days. 3 months. A heartbeat of time. That is how long we give leaders to learn.

Even the President of the United States gets 100 days to get up to speed. Or, at least that is what we say. But if we are honest, we are looking for immediate changes.

Think of what we are asking. The leader needs to be in place, understand the organization, the business, the customers, the stockholders, investors, leadership team, regulators, the competition, the global marketplace...AND make noticeable positive changes. All in 90 days. And if not, we, as share holders or employees or colleagues, get impatient and wonder if we made the right decision to put that leader in place.

What are we asking? Once we ask such a thing do we give that person the tools they need? No. Usually not. We say we do with succession planning...but does that provide the person with the in-depth knowledge, the experiential, contextual background to deeply understand the rationale of the past to avoid making similar mistakes for the future? No. Not because we don't want to but most of the time because we don't know how. Or we simply use magical thinking to say it is all in who we choose. Really. They don't need help because they can pick it up fast, they are smart.

And then we wonder why leaders stay approx 5 years in their top jobs and why they make decisions with such short term gain. You have to wonder whose fault that really is. We set unrealistic expectations and then we reward the wrong behavior.

I have seen time and again the gains made by using a process to illuminate and transfer the deeply held, experiential knowledge held either by the previous leader or within the organization. Not to keep people stuck in the past but to move them forward with the background to make better decisions, good decisions consistently. This work is no longer a luxury, it is a necessity in this fast paced and complex world. Do you want to take a highly visible leadership role without an understanding of the relational or organizational knowledge needed? The cost of doing nothing or the same thing over and over is too high. It is time Knowledge Transfer is seen as the critical business tool that it is.

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.

Get to the point, what do you want from KM?

Ever experienced this? You have a major issue with a product or process and you need fast answers. You ask the folks near you, and they give you the names of people they think may have some expertise to offer. Two of the three have retired. hmmm...

Ok, so you find the one that's still in the organization and find that she is on vacation. In Bali. No cell phone with her. hmm....

You turn to online search within the company portal. You try search term after search term and you get document after document with titles that seem not to make any sense, and nothing quite on point. Or maybe they are but it will take you hours to weed through to find out for sure.

Now what. You think, "Hey, I know, I'll try Google!". So you look outside your own company to answer a critical issue by using information that you can not verify from sources who may well either be competitors or vendors, reliable or not. What is wrong with this picture?

And yet, when you are asked to participate in knowledge management initiatives, what answer do you give?
"I don't have time." Really. You don't have time? Just how many hours per week or per month do you spend looking for answers to critical questions and not being able to locate what you need?

This is so very common in our organizations today. We have time to spend two hours trying to locate someone who has expertise in the area we are working on, only to find they have moved on or they aren't the ones to answer us, and then an hour or two trying to find the relevant documents only to be frustrated enough to turn to the external searches like Google where we do not utilize the learning of our own organization but turn to information we must then (and hopefully do) validate. Is there not some logic missing in this picture?

What would be logical is to solve the challenge of not being able to use the expertise, experience, information and knowledge your company holds because you can not locate it.

Many companies have some type of knowledge management initiatives they are working on. What is the purpose of the knowledge management initiatives you are asked to participate in? If it is not to meet your business needs, then tell the folks offering them up that they are on the wrong path. Tell them, respectfully, what you really need from KM. And then be prepared to spend the time to make it worthwhile. Do not expect a silver bullet but know that it takes time to identify critical knowledge and experts, and make that available, it takes time to develop the right processes and tools and more than that, it takes time and role modeling to change the behaviors that got the organization into the shape it is now in.  A focus on business value and time to make it work is crucial to making KM effective. Make sure you get what you want from managing knowledge and that you take the time and the responsibility to put your shoulder to the wheel to make it work.

Get what you need from the KM effort by getting to the point. Think of the great work you can do with the hours you would have been spending looking for things you need but can not find. That is where you can get to but not overnight. However, as more people transition from the organization or within it, the problem of finding the expertise will be worse not better without the extra effort. Go for it. You'll be glad you did.

Yes but can you make it real

I am both enamored and impressed by the number of people interested in Systems Thinking. Using LinkedIn, you can join the various Systems Thinking groups that have become popular lately. Systems Thinking World, a LinkedIn group started by Gene Bellinger of Norfolk, Virginia, USA is one such interesting group. The introductions as people join are in themselves fascinating and the discussions can be engaging. However, I agree with those who post about the need to make it real, to make the work applicable for our clients. Theory is critically important and we must continue to push the envelope, to research, to develop new thought. However my client groups need to learn quickly, to increase both competencies and capabilities and to move forward now. Like it or not, that is the reality they face.

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=2639211

It is true, I believe, for all business disciplines-- we must help our clients grow, help them both survive and thrive in this uncertain time, help them understand how to be agile, to attract and retain the best talent, to work across boundaries in ways they have not had to before. They must bridge generations, genders, cultures, geographic barriers, various ways of doing business and they must do it fast and effectively.

My team has been working hard to create tools and processes that can be taught to the organizations with whom we work, tools and processes they can apply tomorrow-- or today. Yes, I introduce new components like Organizational Trust, Learning Organization ideas and Systems Thinking. The difference with the theoretical folks is that I do that real time so the tools can become usable immediately and adults can learn in the way they do best-- by applying them when needed. I do not say this from ego, I say this from a practical position. We need to pull together to help our clients and ourselves be the best we can be. Let's do it by applying what we know strategically and creating the practical tools, processes and change vehicles to help them step into what they need to do to create a brighter future.

A Site That Grabs You By Your Curiosity

The caution was 'be careful, once you enter this site you'll want to spend a lot of time there'-- and it is oh so true.

Nearly every day I hear people say they are challenged to get people to be interested in the information/knowledge they want to share or perplexed about how to present what people really want to know.

The answer, they proclaim, is that if it is not immediately usable, people will not be interested in the information

WARNING: This site will debunk at least some of those ideas.

The site I reference here is 'Structurae: An International Database and Gallery of Structures' http://en.structurae.de/index.cfm

In knowledge management we spend a great deal of time talking about immediate relevancy and how important it is to make the information usable at the moment people want it or they will not take the time to look.

Well folks, I am no architect, nor am I a structural engineer and I have no desire to build or remodel a home. Yet I am fascinated to learn about the structural details and construction methods of everything from a refurbished apartment building in Paris to the Pyramids.

Why? Because we are all curious, at least to some extent, about the world around us.

We forget that people are people and that around the globe we DO have some common experiences. One of those is that we are surrounded by structures that peak our curiosity or grab our attention. Those structures we do not experience in person, we see in pictures and this is a place to learn about them in a level of detail that feels as though we are voyeuristically looking in on a personal database, something we are not usually allowed to see.

Is it perfect? No. Do I care that it is not perfect? Not in the least.

Let's do more in our own work to tap each other's creativity and curiosity and let go, just a bit, of the immediacy we are so addicted to. We all need to look up and look out-- look at our world not just at what sits on top of our desk or is articulated in our goals. Let our goal be to explore the world around us. This site is a great place to begin that journey.

Pop-Up Knowledge Management

Frequently we talk about the need and the benefit of transferring and reusing experience and knowledge from one function or department of an organization to another function or department. Although the benefits go without saying, cross boundary knowledge sharing is not common.

Although the organization already has the knowledge, culture often does not encourage or enhance the possibilities or looking elsewhere for applicable ideas. Even as I write this, the logic of NOT doing that eludes me and at the same time I realize the difficulties in working across boundaries.

In the same spirit, looking outside of our usual realm for ideas from other industries, ideas presented to solve problems similar but not the same to our own is very useful and can be economically prudent. Like recycling and reusing materials, recycling and reusing our ideas brings us forward more quickly, with less time and effort.

So, today I looked outside of the usual ideas around knowledge management to the concept of Pop-Up Retail.

The idea of Pop-Up retail and Pop-Up stores is not new but it is getting increasing publicity. Why? Because it is a fast and inexpensive way to create a buzz about your product or service, sell items quickly and learn from your new customers.

Trendingwatching has done a number of stories about Pop-Up Retail over the years as well as lately http://trendwatching.com/ and the July issue of Inc had a story about How to Do Pop-Up Stores http://www.inc.com/magazine/20100701/how-to-open-a-pop-up-store.html


Why do I bring that up? Let’s take the concept and reapply it.

Let’s think about Pop-Up Knowledge Management (KM)or Knowledge Transfer (KT). We usually talk about the implementation of KM as a long process requiring perseverance and patience. Ok, so humor me here….What if we tried, as one part of our strategy, to use Pop-Up KM or KT?

If we apply the principles from the INC article, we concentrate on the buzz we could create to get the KM word out to the organization, the inventory we could let go (or the processes we could introduce to the audience), testing new products or vetting new business ideas. I don’t know about you, but I see the fit.

Jazz up the introduction of KM by creating very quick, impactful KM (and re-usable) activities like our ‘Active Learning Sessions’ , after action reviews, quick lessons learned, or even the 3 key questions to ask during meetings:
1. What is the most important thing we learned during the meeting
2. Who else needs to know
3. How will we inform them?

Do not make it difficult but do make it meaningful. Choose the right topic, create fun and easy to use materials and invigorate the audience by creating a buzz. Use internal blogs, meetings, posters, internal social networking,….or something very dramatic like email or phone calls to let them know the Pop-Up KM or KT is coming.

Let people know the process is available for a short time, let them know why, let them know how to use it and let them know what to do with the results. Then, make sure you communicate the results.

No, this will not shift the culture alone. Pop-Up KM is only one part of your KM strategy.

It will, however, create some excitement, some fun and help make KM or KT much more trendy and interesting. Be creative! Enjoy sharing the idea of KM and celebrate the outcomes, not matter how big or small they may be. Keep the momentum going!

And try something from another industry --- do this type of thing occasionally so people get used to the idea, are reminded to try it again, see that they are rewarded in a fun way for using it, make it part of the positive part of the culture

The Beauty of Brilliance: IP from the UK

Inventions, the truly useful, clever and elegant types most especially, are inspiring to look at and even more so when you are able to learn about the background of the concept. The BBC has put forward a wonderful narrated slideshow providing background into some of the most innovative marketed ideas from Great Britain in the past 10 years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11180146

The slide show is interesting on many fronts. First, it is a visually compelling view of some well known British innovation--you'll recognize Dyson's new fan concept or Yoomi, the self warming baby bottle or the Gocyle. In addition the presentation provides the context of how the inventions came to be. The inventors themselves provide a bit of advice as well.

This is good knowledge sharing-- visually stimulating, intersting, contextual. I recommend watching it for enjoyment, for a bit of learning about IP and as another way to transfer knowledge in our organizations.

Data Visualization -- a Must Read

If you have not seen the David McCandless video 'Data is Beautiful' on the YouTube TED Talks series....it is a must view.

Not only will you see the power of Data Visualization as a way to quickly make sense of and see trends and patterns in data, but you will learn a great deal about the global economy. Yes, the video is 21 minutes long-- and it will be 21 of the most incredible minutes spent in a long time. I would chance to say it will shift your thinking, especially on the benefit of visualizing data.

http://http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLqjQ55tz-U

As Knowledge Managers it is our responsiblity to make good use of data, to anticipate and prepare for challenges and to also identify those issues which we might fear but probably not the issues we should be fearing.

David talks about the quote "Data is the New Oil" but his response is that "Data is the New Soil" because it is such fertile ground.

Data visualization is a tool to clarify problems and identify solutions. It is also a powerful tool for us to understand the viewpoints of others, reflect on our own viewpoints and to deeply examine each.

I highly recommend you watch this video. Think about what data means in your role, your company and your life. The theme of how to look at the patterns and trends, and how to use this to help organizations be smarter, faster and more agile will emerge again and again in this blog.
We must do it carefully, mindfully, but we must do it.


Nicely done David.

We Can Connect, But Can We Learn?

As I am doing a bit of research for a client, I am struck by how much and how little has changed in the world of Knowledge Management. I started doing this work in 1994 and realize that I was lucky--I began developing and using the concepts of knowledge management because I had a business problem to solve! So, right from the get-go my work was about solving problems.

In contrast, KM was often thought of in those days as the next great consulting opportunity and therefore was sometimes a solution LOOKING for a problem. That is a very bad way to do business.

We quickly realized, while problem solving with KM, that one of the big benefits was building bridges across all types of boundaries. Organizations were growing as fast as the economy and in the mid-90's the economy was rocking and rolling. We connected people to people and people to data/information and thought life was grand.

The marching of time provides another view and increases our abilities and the complexities of work, life and the world.
Building bridges helps-- but in these times of less resources, little time, no money...people often don't have an understanding of how to use the connections and sometimes not even the permission to do so, based on time, level or goal orientation.

I do not mean to say every organization now has the ability to connect to what is needed across boundaries and that workers have easy accessibility to the knowledge they need for their jobs. No, those problems still exist.

What I am saying is that there is also an increasingly large challenge for workers to know what to do once they find the information or knowledge they need. Do they have the time to act on it, the right to make changes, the ability to bring it forward. Does management allow them to USE the information (learn from it, apply it, discuss it, share it) once they HAVE connected to it?

Do workers at all levels have time to learn?

To make sense of the data we so painstakingly created, identified and connected people to, we have to have the time to reflect, to ponder, to try, TO LEARN....and the critical thinking skills to know what criteria to use, what influences and thought processes, to make good decisions with the knowledge we can access.

Life is complex. Let me boil down what I see. We have the technology and processes to help people find the data, information, knowledge and expertise they need inside and outside the organization--IF the company takes the time, money and resources to implement them.

We also need the time to reflect on and learn so decisions made are well considered, forward thinking and sustainable. And, we need to have enough contextual information and experience to understand how to make sense of the information and knowledge provided to think logically through a decision, considering all of the factors, influences and understand the potential outcomes.

We need to connect, reflect, learn and think critically.

To make the endeavor worthwhile, we also need to share what we have learned. Can you imagine the power in that? It is not just about getting people to the information. They have to know what to do with it. The organization must give them the skills, the competencies and the time.

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.

My own knowledge transfer during transition

The term 'walking the talk' has taken on a whole new, and powerful, meaning for me. For the past 16 years, I've helped companies in transition identify and transfer business critical knowledge.

Now, it's my turn.

I have brought a number of new people into the fold here at KLHagen, including two new associates (well not exactly 'new' but more about that later), two talented consultants and a fantastic business manager. What does that mean for the business?

It means increased capacity, expanded competencies and capabilities and enhanced service offerings. KLHagen is moving forward.

What it means for me personally is that I must walk the talk. It means I am in the process of identifying and transferring my tacit knowledge about tacit knowledge transfer. 16 years worth of processes, ideas, learning, experiences, insights, hints, tips, thought processes, alternatives, watch outs, success criteria, rationale...I think you get the picture.

And, it's very good for me.

I chose experienced people with strong backgrounds and their own unique, critical and relevant competencies and areas of expertise. I know they are open-minded learners who stand in curiosity while applying all of the years of experience they bring on board to make excellent decisions for our clients. All that being said, I still had to consider how to share the deep experience and expertise these years have brought me.

I will give you an overview of that process in upcoming blogs and provide my own insights as I walk my talk. And, I will introduce you to my new colleagues.

Life ensures we keep learning lessons and getting better at what we do...as long as we are present and authentically show up for the learning. I'm blessed to have such great people to work along side and with on this journey.

Characteristics of a KM Change Agent

Jim Markowsky posted results of a survey he did using the social networking site LinkedIn. Jim surveyed the audience of various LinkedIn groups, asking for the top 10 characteristics of an organizational change agent. I found reviewing the survey results to be quite interesting and it made me consider how these characteristics might change if we focused on KM change agents.

Two characteristics not mentioned here which I believe crucial for KM change agents are trust and respect of their colleagues and leaders. I am surprised they did not show up here but I think it is well worth a bit of discussion.

Trust, as I consider it, has 3 attributes:
1. Sincerity-- knowing the person means what they say or promise. 2. Competency--knowing the person can do what they say or promise. 3. Reliability-- witnessed over time, you know the person does what they say or promise. Those whom you trust you often also respect.

As we continue in a time of uncertainty, trust becomes more and more important. As individuals or as leaders, we must never underestimate the value or impact of having or holding trust. If we want to bring forward the knowledge critical to organizational sustainability and success, trust is the ultimate enabler.

http://linkedin.com/

Posting of Survey Results (Organizational Change Network on LinkedIn): What are the Top 10 Characteristics of an Organizational Change Agent?
Survey Results: Based on a 1 - 10 rating scale, 10 being highest.
Average score:
1. Skilled Communicator 7.13 / 10
2. Emotionally Intelligent 6.45 / 10
3. Strong Leader 5.92 / 10
4. Excellent Problem Solver 5.81 / 10
5. Persuasive 5.41 / 10
6. Courageous 5.22 / 10
7. Strong Analytical Skills 5.04 / 10
8. Effective Educator 5.03 / 10
9. Flexible 4.79 / 10
10. Accomplished Project Manager 4.23 / 10
Survey Participants: There were 159 global participants in the survey. The survey was posted on the following Discussion Boards: Organizational Change Network, Network of Organizational Change Managers, Innovative Leadership & Change Management Expert Innovators Network, Change Agents, SAP/ERP Training & Change Practitioners, Organizational Change Practitioners, Organization Development Network, Change Consulting. Survey close date: October 30, 2008. Survey conducted by: Jim Markowsky, X-Factor Business Solutions

The challenge and payoff of managing knowledge

It never fails. About 3 times a week, sometimes more often, I am reminded that knowledge management (like personal growth) is not for the faint of heart. It is not easy. Occasionally (though not often) it is not fun. But it is almost always worthwhile, if we keep an eye toward the goal of building trust, collaboration, communication and respectfully sharing critical knowledge.

Even with good intentions, the work can be challenging. Just recently, I was asked to speak to a potential client who was well aware of the need in his organization to retain and transfer deeply held knowledge from those about to transition out of the organization. He knew there was business risk when that knowledge was no longer available, knew he may lose customers as new employees took over long standing accounts. He knew his business operations were not as well codified and understood as they needed to be to sustain success. He could look me in the eye and point out why he needed to use knowledge management.

Yet, he wanted one silver bullet, one answer quick and easy to solve the fact that he and the leadership team had not developed a culture of trust, had not role modeled collaboration and had rewarded heroism and individual contributions over collaboration and communication.

He was upset that I could not provide a 2 month answer to a problem it took 20 years to create. I could not, would not, lie to him.

I will not support the short sighted view of business I witness so often in today's environment. Managing knowledge, even the deeply held tacit kind, can be done in a timely, well considered, organized fashion but it will still take effort, time and patience. Knowledge is accumulated over time, through decisions made well and those not made well resulting in learning. Anything accumulated over time is worth taking some time and effort to sift through and pass on.

No, KM is not for the faint of heart. However for those who put their heart in their work, in their organizations and want to see sustained success, satisfied employees and returning customers, the challenge is well worth the pay off. I have participated in and witnessed that payoff many times and it is always worth the time it took to make it happen.

A new blog for you to review. kindness and excellence. Great topics and a well done blog:
http://blog.kindexcellence.com/

What Communication Takes

Blogging has many of the same characteristics of relationship building. You make contact, check out each other's ideas and values.... if there is interest in the ideas and commonality in the values, you may continue the communication and learn more about each other.

Good blogging also requires feedback and give and take from both the audience and the blogger. Additionally blogging requires nurturing and time. These characteristics are true with all knowledge management just as they are with relationships in general.

After a hiatus, I'm about to announce a new blog and a new website (same location, but a few updates) which will both get the nurturing and time they need. There is more call now than ever for assistance in managing knowledge and we need good forums to dialogue with each other on how to ensure we all continually learn and grow, individually and in our organizations. We must. The alternatives are evident and staring us directly in the face. I look forward to building this with you, to learning from you and to sharing my learnings with you once again.

In the meantime, if you want to see knowledge painstakingly shared from well before the year 1000, check out the website now housing the ongoing work to share the library from St Gallen, a collection of the oldest medieval books in the world: www.cesg.unifr.ch

144 manuscripts from this Swiss Abbey library are already available online. This is NOT part of the work being done by Google, but rather by separate grants and donations. And we complain about sharing 50 years of knowledge in organizations?