This will likely be my last blog. I know we were not "required" to blog these, but wanted to look them over and thought that blogging made sense.
The readings that went into my "Convergance" post (previous) and final project are highlighted here. I am going to pick my favorite article from each of the remaining zip files and blog about it. There were many article in the last weeks, so I'm not even going to try to get them all.
The pace of topics covered for the last few weeks seems to have picked up, but the substance to the topics are shallower. Therefore, what a great balance to wrap things up!
Here we go....
Week 8 Article
Introduction to PMI’s Project Management’s Life Cycle – Egan
As an IT professional, I find the PMI life cycle very interesting. It really was meant to be a waterfall approach, but with agile and iterative cycles, the PM practice is changing. Less and less documentation is required ahead of time and spans of development are shorter. As a result, the practice is adapting.
I so a bit of project management work myself, but do not classify myself as a project manager. With the information gathered in this KM course, it is easy to see that the PM role can be increased or enhanced by making use of knowledge. The templates and best practices we discussed can be applied and used thought the project lifecycle. I believe that KM has a link to all areas of practice an PM is the governing role over project areas.
However, not all work is project work and does not require a PM. Therefore, I would definitely think that KM needs a champion outside the PM practice, but PM must make use of KM when managing a project.
Week 9 Article – Best Practices
Defining Best Practices APQC
This is a very short article, but drives home one point; there is not one best practice due to the fact that everyone is different. I would additionally charge that time and personal preferences have a big part in what best practices should be used. Best practices should be refined by the practitioners that use them.
Usually only one person (but not always) will author a best practice and this person may or may not have the “best” knowledge. I believe that best practices are validated and improved by others. Time will change some things and not others.
Week 9 - BPM
Three Examples of the Worst BPM Practices. – Olding
The first “worst practice” is that IT professionals may not have the expertise to lead a BPM initiative. I would definitely agree with this. Critical thinking and modeling is imperative to BPM. Understanding the business processes may or may not be understood by IT and the skills needed to improve are definitely not.
The second pitfall is underestimating the skills need from BPM. At my work, we have separate “BPI” groups that usually facilitate sessions. Sometimes out of the box thinking and industry knowledge can be very valuable.
Finally, the last point is not to blame end users. Again, I would agree with this. You need to not only understand the end user processes, but have to get buy-in from them and their managers. The job of BPM is to make processes better and BPM professionals are charged with evaluating and selling these ideas.
Week 9 – Organizational Development
The Mysterious Art of KM performance – Davenport
The famous 3 by 3 framework. I really enjoy and can relate to frameworks. Degree of segmentation versus degree of choice is an interesting paradox. The one-size-fits-all versus the one-size-fits-one is the age old struggle. Mandatory specialization versus mass personization. These are really market factors that many companies make and break on. I’m not sure how KM falls directly into these, but I can speculate that the more uniform a solution, the more explicit the knowledge can be and the more personalization that occurs will require more tacit knowledge.
Week 10 – KM and PM
SHARED KNOWLEDGE, “GLITCHES,” AND PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE – Hoopes
What I got out of this article was the figure that showed how practices can translate into performance in the form of shared knowledge, cooperation, and coordination. The article states that these are “alternate” means, but I think it is varying degrees of “shared knowledge” to which this article want to focus. Nothing terribly outstanding to me here, but it is important to know that performance is impacted by the practices that are implemented and PM is primarily focused on process.
Week 10 – Management
KM Metrics Guide for DON KM – Navy
Interesting but difficult to follow article. I believe that as in figure 5, a balanced scorecard is implemented in may organizations. However, most companies do not pubize their scorecards as they are proprietary. This article is interesting as it shares the core focuses of the Navy. Measuring performance must be linked to an organization’s goals and vision. This article keeps it’s vision and strategy in the center. However, I believe that most organizations today are migrating away from this and looking at the customer as the center of metrics. “Customer Obsessed” organizations as I’ve seen want to measure what the end-user values.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Convergence
Convergence for me, as probably designed by the course, happened with the final project. We discussed in class the notion of nodes and relatoinships. Solutions can be formed with techology and organization changes. The final project template simpilies it to the following steps....
Overview (process of KM)
Problem ==> Root Cause ==> Solution ==> Rationale ==> Metrics
Appendices (supporting the "Overview")
Appendix A (Root Cause [Fishbone]) ==> Checklist for ID'ing (cause) ==> Solutions ( Technology => Organizational Components => Organizational Culture)
This really summarizes the course nicely and for my "problem," this helps to summarize and draw together the ideas of the course. As the Guinness Beer commercials phrases, "Genius !!!".
Without this project and ultimately the template, everything would not have tied together nicely (for me). Honestly, in the classes we discuss all these separately, but they all hit me in the "convergence" of the final document. Really any problem can be solved with the use of nodes and relationships. The root cause of any problem needs to be found before the solution can be sought. Templates and best practices will re-enforce this learning.
In my opinion, if there was one thing to take away from this class, it would be the notion of "notions and relationships" .
The second thing would be the difference between knowledge and information. One would think this should be self-evident, but when you really think about it, the difference it the reason for KM.
Overview (process of KM)
Problem ==> Root Cause ==> Solution ==> Rationale ==> Metrics
Appendices (supporting the "Overview")
Appendix A (Root Cause [Fishbone]) ==> Checklist for ID'ing (cause) ==> Solutions ( Technology => Organizational Components => Organizational Culture)
This really summarizes the course nicely and for my "problem," this helps to summarize and draw together the ideas of the course. As the Guinness Beer commercials phrases, "Genius !!!".
Without this project and ultimately the template, everything would not have tied together nicely (for me). Honestly, in the classes we discuss all these separately, but they all hit me in the "convergence" of the final document. Really any problem can be solved with the use of nodes and relationships. The root cause of any problem needs to be found before the solution can be sought. Templates and best practices will re-enforce this learning.
In my opinion, if there was one thing to take away from this class, it would be the notion of "notions and relationships" .
The second thing would be the difference between knowledge and information. One would think this should be self-evident, but when you really think about it, the difference it the reason for KM.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Information vs. Knowledge
While in class a couple of weeks ago, we discussed (or rather re-enforced previous discussions) the difference between information and knowledge. I started my elevator question with comparing the two, and thought it to be on of the critical lessons learned in the course. While putting it in the wiki, I noticed that someone else that make the same distincition and almost the same wording as I. So, I put together a list of what I could find in the course material and some that I thought myself.
Most of the differences is not simply one or the other, but rather a continuum. Some of these examples are better than others,
Monday, May 26, 2008
Elevator Questions
1. "I see from your transcripts that you took a course in KM. What is KM?"
· To define knowledge management, it is first important to define the difference between knowledge and information. Knowledge is a subset of information and can be described information that has been applied and processed. Knowing how to use information is knowledge. So KM is the process of managing this knowledge so that it can be stored and re-used by an individual or organization.
· There are many definitions for KM and most involve a process of acquiring, structuring, storing, and publishing knowledge. Knowledge management can involve systems, technology, and processes. Personal and organizational problems can stem from a lack of KM and KM can in turn solve those problems.
2. "Tell me how you would apply KM in my organization."
· KM can be applied in many different ways in an organization, but it really depends on the organizational needs and issues. I would start by asking you what are your problems, and then I could recommend how KM systems may be able to fix them. KM is not a set of specific technologies and one size does not fit all.
· For example, if your problem was a lack of trained personnel, I would ask why that is and first try to get to the root cause. Then I could recommend a process or a technology that could help.
· Every company uses KM to some degree. Having written procedures or a intranet portal can be a form of KM. More robust technologies are available to help manage the knowledge within an organization, but again, they should relate to the organizational need.
3. "What KM technologies would you recommend here?"
· As stated in the last question, there are many technologies available and a solution should be tailored based on the organization and the need. There is no one technology that can solve all your problems. I would be more than happy to try to help you evaluate the issues and choose the best for your company. The main reason for knowledge management is to address issues with capturing knowledge. Technologies do not have to be sophisticated, but the change must be accepted by your company.
· Many KM technologies like email, portals, search engines, and document storage are widely used, but may need to be revamped in order to capture and disseminate the knowledge of employees.
4. "KM sounds great, but how do I justify KM here?"
· KM may be incorporated in existing technologies like email or document storage and justifying the cost is like any other projects. The benefits must be quantified and measured. A KM strategy and plan is the first step in justifying the need to formal KM systems.
5. "KM sounds great, but what KM metrics do you recommend?"
· KM metrics are used to quantify the value and effectiveness of KM initiatives. The KM strategy that I discussed earlier should dictate what metrics are important. If your company has problems with training new employees, then metrics around the time and effort taken to train employees would be important. Metrics must be continually evaluated and used for improvement. They are the means to know if KM is working and must be aligned with the organizational objectives. Every organization will have different metrics and the correct ones for your company must help it improve and evaluate the KM initiates.
6. "Tell me the main barriers to adopting KM I can anticipate. How would you overcomethem?"
· Managing the change of any systems is a major barrier. Most people do not like change and will resist. People need to see what is in it for them. Change management must work hand-in-hand when any new systems are introduced.
· Additionally, a lack of communication and incentives to use KM and it’s technologies often makes people resist KM. Again, the need for KM must be communicated and business processes must integrate the technologies. Incentive can be given to employees for contributing to the effort.
· Many forms of knowledge is very difficult to capture. Tacit knowledge by definition is not easily articulated. Teaching people how they learn and how to teach can help to overcome this obstacle. When training a new employee, the new employee may be able to articulate knowledge learned more easily than the teacher.
· Certain people do not want to be known as an expert or want to share knowledge if they are an expert. People don’t want to be pigeon-holed into doing the same job over and over. In technology, changes are continuous an overachievers want to learn something new and not work on the same thing repeatedly. Additionally, many people are afraid to share what they know for the think that they will not longer be needed if others can access their knowledge. The organization must reward individuals for contributions and find new ways for people to advance.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Week 6a Article Summary
Now for the second part of the reading for this week. I’m taking a little different approach based on the blog questions posed and the length of the articles. I’m just going to answer the questions posed. The headings of the articles are bold, the questions are in italics, and the answers are normal.
The Chaos of Content
List 3 sources of tension between IT and the user community, in terms of enterprise content management.
o Centralize vs. Empower (IT vs. Business)
o Simplify vs. Access (IT vs. Business)
o Manage vs. Leverage (IT vs. Business)
Unlock the Value of Content to Maximize Online Business Performance
Getting the right content, to the right person, is a popular KM phrase.
How can better content enable enterprises to optimize the customer experience?
o Strengthen customer loyalty.
o Achieve unified brands, messages and corporate image.
o Accelerate worldwide product launches and promotions.
o Optimize customer process efficiencies.
o Provide regulatory compliance and security.
Content Management vs. Knowledge Management
The article mentions some differences between CM and KM. Which of these terms describe CM, and which describe KM?
o Capture - KM
o Create - CM
o Route - KM
o Manage - CM
o Convert - KM
o Publish - CM
Is CM or KM bigger in scope, i.e. does one belong under the other’s umbrella KM?
o KM is bigger, more frequent, and more fluid than CM
o CM belongs under the umbrella of KM
Managing Email Overload: The Smart, Secure and Legal Way
Name 3 drivers that dictate what an email management solution must do.
o Corporate Records for regulatory compliance and legal discovery
o Email growth as an IT headache
o Source of business critical information
Name 5 requirements of any email management solution.
o Retain messages in compliance with regulations and corporate policies;
o Provide a highly scalable repository able to keep pace with email volume growth and long retention periods to aggregate billions of email messages;
o Facilitate searching as required for legal discovery;
o Improve system performance and reliability; and
o Integrate email with other corporate records and content.
What are some consequences of not having an email management system?
o Overloaded servers will degrade performance
o Users will have limits
o Expenses for non-compliance related to legal discovery and regulatory requests
o Information that could be shared is lost
Today's Search: All The Power. No Pain.
What are some criteria for evaluating an enterprise search solution?
Information location (multiple repositories), data formats, speed needed to search, need to change the user interface, training time, ability to export data, support, and implentation time.
The Emerging Role of SharePoint in ECM
Do you think SharePoint is a good choice for students to search a discussion forum on COLWeb? Why or why not?
No, the cost is very high for one reason. Additionally, as the article suggests, it is not easily integrated with other applications and requirements for the COLWeb would likely not work out of the box. Sharepoint is also better suited for a large number of documents or forums rather than a sub-system.
Top Five Reasons to Outsource Document Capture
Name the “top five reasons to outsource your document capture project”.
1. Focus on your organization’s core business processes;
2. Improve service levels to clients and reduce transaction costs at the same time;
3. Faster and more secure implementation of compliance and discovery initiatives;
4. Providing near-term cost savings while avoiding technological obsolescence; and
5. Cost-effective disaster recovery.
Will Your Next CMS Scale to Meet Your Demands?
Is content management something you buy, or something you do? Explain.
CM is something you do because it is the process of managing information for you and your customers. The technology that administers CM will come and go, but the managing information is something at you must always do.
The Value of SharePoint-Based ECM Solutions
What are the key chunks of functionality that an enterprise content management system should have?
Document scanning, imaging, report management, business process management, content lifecycles, unified policy administration, central audit logging, reporting and intelligent content organization
How to Correct Your Organization’s Content Myopia
What is the best approach to transforming these business areas with Enterprise Content Management (ECM)?
o Accounts payable - Document Management - streamline and automate related processes—everything from the receipt of invoices and supporting documents through approval and archiving—while ensuring compliance with government regulations and company policies.
o Contract management - Workflow - control and accelerate the contract process from authoring and approvals to execution.
o Client engagement - Collaborate on Projects Real-time - provide secure, central,Web-based workspaces that enable collaboration across projects and around the globe.
o Compliance - enforce government regulations and company policies enterprisewide so content remains complete, accurate and secure.
o New product development - support real-time decision making and reduce time-to-market by facilitating global collaboration.
o Enterprise marketing - overcome the many challenges posed by today’s global marketplace. With the right approach, you can streamline the marketing process and provide seamless access to marketing content. Coordinate campaigns, product launches and ongoing branding and marketing communications. Keep projects on track, reduce overall costs and exert greater control over brand assets using media repositories, creative workflows and virtual workspaces.
Widgets, Wizzbangs and Whoozits
New functionality on your web site should be in alignment with your company's business model.
Give an example of when a discussion forum might not be a good idea on a website.
When it is anticipated that customers may have negative feedback due to turnover or negative experiences.
Is On-Demand Content Management Right for You?
In a few paragraphs, explain when SaaS would be an appropriate alternative for content management?
A SaaS would be a good option if you need much functionality that is not easily found in COTS software. Features such as fax functionality, OCR, and workflow make SaaS a viable option.
Also, if time to market is short, Saas solutions only need to be configured and not implemented. This can be days rather than months. Trial periods can give users the feel without any customizations.
If cost is a concern, SaaS is usually a monthly fee. Costly up-front development costs are avoided and total ownership cost is lower.
If the needs of the business are rapidly changing, SaaS does not require upgrades and new functionality is automatically delivered. The user can decide with updates to take from the SaaS.
Finally, if most of your needs (80%) can be met with a SaaS, then it is likely a good idea. The remaining 20% can be usually be configured.
Feedback on this exercise.
Most of the questions did capture the heart of the articles, but it was a lot of work with the other articles. I did enjoy the articles especially the first one. Personally, I like less struture in the blogs, but this was a good way to get through a lot of material more quickly.
Week 6 Article Summary
Wow, we’re already into week 6…more than half way through. I'm doing the first part of the articles here the the "6a" in a seperate post after this one.
Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning. King.
Figure 1 show the KM cycle model and is very similar to the diagram that we have been talking about in class starting with knowledge in a cloud. The class model goes if my notes serve me correctly…
Knowledge => Capture => Structure => Store => Disseminate => Use => Reuse => Integrate
We also had a simpler model in the second class that went…
Knowledge => Encoding => Channel => Information
So the model presented in the article looks to be much more from an organizational point of view while our class discussions were more general. Sub-bullets under some of the models provides more information and it is interesting that Nokana’s model from reading a few weeks ago shows how knowledge is created. I still believe that not all tacit knowledge can be encoded. Also acquisition of knowledge was not previously explicitly discussed in the model. Before reading the article I could not tell you the difference between transfer and sharing, but transfer is direct learning from one source to another and sharing is putting information out there for anyone to get.
Per the blog question, the learning aspect has been added in addition to the other sub-points. Learning is in almost the end of the process. That makes sense that to learn something, it must be transferred or shared, but how did it get to be transferred or shared in the first place? Something or someone has to learn about something before it can be stored. I would think that learning also occurs in the creation and acquisition phases. It depends on who is learning it. It may be the context that this is how it is perceived from an organization.
The article states that Organizational Learning (OL) is complimentary to KM. It states that they are really the same thing, but OL is a process and KM is the content. Or it also says that OL is the goal of KM. I like the goal inference better and again it is the context of the organization that creates the OL. My original thinking is that KM encompassed all the concepts of OL and I think it still may. However, OL is a unique concept that can be looked at in addition to KM.
Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Huber.
For this article, the four different ways that an organization learns are listed: Knowledge Acquisition, Information Distribution, Information Interpretation, and Organizational Memory. To answer the blog question about where does media richness fit in here, it is in the Information Interpretation. The article is somewhat theoretical in its definition of media richness, but is on target describing it in terms of the enhancement of the sender and receivers understanding of each other. It really does not talk about technology, but given the time it was written, 1991, it would have missed the current technological trends.
Perception of information is enhanced with media richness by adding sensory information. The expression a picture is worth a 1,000 words is true, but a video is probably worth 1,000,000 words. The media richness exercise with the Metallica song lyrics, song, and video was meant to illustrate the power that media can highlight. This article does address the media, but not our current mediums that further enhance the Information Interpretation.
Unlearning is a new term to me and like media richness falls in the Information Interpretation category for learning. It seems like relatively self-explanatory. However; it is a purposeful action that can lead to new learning and reading about is difficult in the context of the article. Unlearning may be getting rid of undesirable information or even personnel. If undesirable learning is hurting an organization, it must drop them. If they are dropped, but organizational memory learning may also need to be altered. Unlearning is in the same category as media richness, but I really do not think that it should be in the Information Interpretation category and may be better suited for Organization Memory. Interpretation to me means how something is learned while memory is what is retrained. Since unlearning is discarding what is learned memory seems a better fit.
This was a very difficult article to even browse. The concepts are solid, but not my favorite article.
Organizational Learning Questionnaire 12 21 04
I really like the questionnaire. In my profession, we have acquired other companies and always start with a questionnaire to gather knowledge about that institution. Questionnaires are useful to access what the current state is for an unknown situation. Although may of the concepts are subjective, trying to give them values it helpful in understanding.
Working Knowledge How Organizations Manage What They Know.chapter 5.doc
I really liked the introduction to the article and it is much easier to read than Huber. The antidote that to be successful you hire smart people and get them to talk is really obvious, but insightful. The article states that getting them to talk is the difficult part and thus the crux of KM.
Getting people to communicate and the barriers to this communication are summarized nicely in the article. Many of the solutions point to promoting teamwork and “thick communication” (as we discussed in class). Rewards and education are other ways to overcome barriers. One of the biggest barriers that I have seen is lack of time. If everyone had time to transfer knowledge, then many problems could be avoided. Setting aside time to transfer knowledge must come from the top of the organization. Differences in culture and frames of reference are also getting to be very common especially with globalization. This may be one of the most difficult to combat and getting face-to-face time is often difficult.
Transfer = Transmission + Absorption (and Use)
I really like this equation and summarizes KM transfer nicely. Many of the barriers discussed are either a transmission or absorption issue. Media richness as discussed in the Huber article can enhance transmission. Almost any KM issue can fit into this equation.
General Discussion:
Difference between Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning
In my own words without consulting references beyond the articles read here, OL is a part of KM and applies to how KM is applied and learned in an organization. As we’ve discussed before, KM can apply to individuals as well. OL is group behavior and how an organization acquires, uses, retains, and applies knowledge.
Difference between knowledge transfer and OL
Knowledge transfer as described earlier is the transmission and absorption of knowledge. Organizational learning is larger, more formal and encompasses the four categories that Huber describes. Transfer may occur, but in OL it states how to get the knowledge, how to integrate it, how to distribute it, and how to retain it.
Difference between knowledge transfer and KM
Similar to the above question, knowledge transfer is a piece of KM. KM is even broader than OL. Knowledge transfer is one piece of KM and like we discussed in class, almost anything can be classed as a KM problem, but knowledge transfer encompasses only the transmission.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Week 5 Article Summary
This week as part of the articles, we also have been given a list of questions to focus upon as well as some general reflections. I’ll tackle the required questions, but will also blog about any ideas I found interesting. I’ll blog articles in order of the questions.
Action Learning in Action: Transforming Problems and People for World-Class Organizational Learning. Marquardt.
System thinking is a skill that I have personally been trying hard to master. At work, I strive to look at problems from all aspects and think of how it would impact not only my area of expertise, but all areas. I like reading about system thinking and hope that we discuss more than the short blurb in this article.
The six steps of problem solving that are described in the article are fairly self-evident, but laying them out shows where steps are often missed or skipped. Some problems really do need all these steps, but simple problem-solving often does not lend itself to this formal of a model.
I believe that determining the root cause of the problem is the most important step. Problems will occur and be solved, but until the root cause is known, the problem will likely surface again. Getting to the source of the problem will help to understand the problem itself and will be input into the solution.
There are 2 steps that are before the root cause. The first is presenting the problem. This is likely from the person reporting the problem and may or may not be the true problem at hand. In the second step, “reframing the problem”, a group will validate that the problem presented. This is necessary as some problems may be a result of another or not a problem at all. These two steps are necessary to properly identify the problem before the cause of the problem can be determined. I believe that often reframing will lead directly to the root cause especially when the source of the problem is easily found.
After the root cause, the following 3 steps are important to develop solutions, evaluate them and implement. However, these cannot be properly performed with knowing the root cause.
The pizza man story and subsequent dialog about looking for fresh ideas and alternatives is very interesting. I have seen many times when someone new or unfamiliar with a problem presents a questions or solutions that are often overlooked. I also believe that turnover in a company is a good thing because with the same persons doing the same job, stale thinking results. Having new and outside persons look at a problem is a great idea and something that I will have to keep in mind.
Understanding & Supporting Decision Making. Klein.
Naturalists seek to make observations that are a precursor to the traditional decision-making process. Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) is a process of solving problems using analysis and observations in the natural setting of the problem. Traditional decision making starts with a theory and NDM observes before forming a theory. NDM studies problems and does not make immediate decisions. Teams are often set in the problem area like a battlefield instead of using traditional problem solving methods.
Klein challenges that abstraction is not a good thing in problem solving and that seeing that actual problem in its setting may make solving it easier. This makes sense, but is different than some of the abstraction premises made in IT.
Situational awareness is a term used that describes how naturalists make decisions. I think this is a very important phenomenon because in order to solve a problem, you have to be aware of that the situation is and act upon it. Every problem is different and knowing the context of it will lead to the cause and decision.
What Data Mining Can and Can’t Do. Alter.
Data mining, modeling, and warehousing cannot capture randomness in the way people behave. Trends about a demographic may be collected, but individual habits may times cannot be explained. The article challenges that the more data that is collected, the more likely the data may be skewed due to random behavior.
To summarize the article I would say that random behavior cannot be caught by looking at data. Data mining is good for collecting information and breaking it into groups, but cannot be depended upon for all decisions. Sometimes keeping things simple can be better than trying to analyze every minor detail. “Situational awareness” from the previous article is applicable in this article as well. “It depends” is another term that I frequently use because every problem is unique and a one-size-fits-all answer never works.
Five Steps to Business Intelligence Project Success. Wise.
The first part of the article talks how it is difficult to measure intangible benefits. It also talks about time and budget in terms of project success. In class we have talked about you retain only certain knowledge from classes. From one project management class, I have retained the notion that it is not just time and money, but also quality that are factors that act upon each other. If you are on time and on budget, but quality may not be there. And high quality can mean higher costs and longer timeframes. BI is an attempt to gather information in a form which can help drive decisions.
The five steps that are described in this article are very similar to the six steps in the previous article. Identify, determine, understand, train, and implement the solution are similar to problem solving. I also think that the premise of the article is similar to the data mining article above in that the solutions it often depends on the situation. BI must be implemented with the solution in mind.
General Reflections.
“Decision-making” versus “Problem Solving”
Decision-making implies that there are alternatives from which to choose while problem-solving is making the alternatives. I do believe that the two work together very closely, but are different in nature. I think that people use the terms interchangeably.
True or false: There are good decisions, and there are bad decisions.
True, but there are many times decisions that are in the middle and have good and bad consequences. Many problems do not have a binary outcome and therefore cannot be either entirely good or bad. The definition of a “wicked problem” accurately describes that there is not always a good and bad alternative.
True or false: Better information yields better decision making.
True, again sometimes. Based on the last two articles, I’ll straddle the fence and say that better information can help, but not always. Randomness dictates that even with much information, decisions do not always follow a pattern.
True or false: Better knowledge yields better decision making.
True, again sometimes for the same reason above. However, I would rather have knowledge than information. Knowledge will have more context than just information. Knowledge is knowing what to do with information. Information alone is useless unless it is interpreted correctly.
Action Learning in Action: Transforming Problems and People for World-Class Organizational Learning. Marquardt.
System thinking is a skill that I have personally been trying hard to master. At work, I strive to look at problems from all aspects and think of how it would impact not only my area of expertise, but all areas. I like reading about system thinking and hope that we discuss more than the short blurb in this article.
The six steps of problem solving that are described in the article are fairly self-evident, but laying them out shows where steps are often missed or skipped. Some problems really do need all these steps, but simple problem-solving often does not lend itself to this formal of a model.
I believe that determining the root cause of the problem is the most important step. Problems will occur and be solved, but until the root cause is known, the problem will likely surface again. Getting to the source of the problem will help to understand the problem itself and will be input into the solution.
There are 2 steps that are before the root cause. The first is presenting the problem. This is likely from the person reporting the problem and may or may not be the true problem at hand. In the second step, “reframing the problem”, a group will validate that the problem presented. This is necessary as some problems may be a result of another or not a problem at all. These two steps are necessary to properly identify the problem before the cause of the problem can be determined. I believe that often reframing will lead directly to the root cause especially when the source of the problem is easily found.
After the root cause, the following 3 steps are important to develop solutions, evaluate them and implement. However, these cannot be properly performed with knowing the root cause.
The pizza man story and subsequent dialog about looking for fresh ideas and alternatives is very interesting. I have seen many times when someone new or unfamiliar with a problem presents a questions or solutions that are often overlooked. I also believe that turnover in a company is a good thing because with the same persons doing the same job, stale thinking results. Having new and outside persons look at a problem is a great idea and something that I will have to keep in mind.
Understanding & Supporting Decision Making. Klein.
Naturalists seek to make observations that are a precursor to the traditional decision-making process. Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) is a process of solving problems using analysis and observations in the natural setting of the problem. Traditional decision making starts with a theory and NDM observes before forming a theory. NDM studies problems and does not make immediate decisions. Teams are often set in the problem area like a battlefield instead of using traditional problem solving methods.
Klein challenges that abstraction is not a good thing in problem solving and that seeing that actual problem in its setting may make solving it easier. This makes sense, but is different than some of the abstraction premises made in IT.
Situational awareness is a term used that describes how naturalists make decisions. I think this is a very important phenomenon because in order to solve a problem, you have to be aware of that the situation is and act upon it. Every problem is different and knowing the context of it will lead to the cause and decision.
What Data Mining Can and Can’t Do. Alter.
Data mining, modeling, and warehousing cannot capture randomness in the way people behave. Trends about a demographic may be collected, but individual habits may times cannot be explained. The article challenges that the more data that is collected, the more likely the data may be skewed due to random behavior.
To summarize the article I would say that random behavior cannot be caught by looking at data. Data mining is good for collecting information and breaking it into groups, but cannot be depended upon for all decisions. Sometimes keeping things simple can be better than trying to analyze every minor detail. “Situational awareness” from the previous article is applicable in this article as well. “It depends” is another term that I frequently use because every problem is unique and a one-size-fits-all answer never works.
Five Steps to Business Intelligence Project Success. Wise.
The first part of the article talks how it is difficult to measure intangible benefits. It also talks about time and budget in terms of project success. In class we have talked about you retain only certain knowledge from classes. From one project management class, I have retained the notion that it is not just time and money, but also quality that are factors that act upon each other. If you are on time and on budget, but quality may not be there. And high quality can mean higher costs and longer timeframes. BI is an attempt to gather information in a form which can help drive decisions.
The five steps that are described in this article are very similar to the six steps in the previous article. Identify, determine, understand, train, and implement the solution are similar to problem solving. I also think that the premise of the article is similar to the data mining article above in that the solutions it often depends on the situation. BI must be implemented with the solution in mind.
General Reflections.
“Decision-making” versus “Problem Solving”
Decision-making implies that there are alternatives from which to choose while problem-solving is making the alternatives. I do believe that the two work together very closely, but are different in nature. I think that people use the terms interchangeably.
True or false: There are good decisions, and there are bad decisions.
True, but there are many times decisions that are in the middle and have good and bad consequences. Many problems do not have a binary outcome and therefore cannot be either entirely good or bad. The definition of a “wicked problem” accurately describes that there is not always a good and bad alternative.
True or false: Better information yields better decision making.
True, again sometimes. Based on the last two articles, I’ll straddle the fence and say that better information can help, but not always. Randomness dictates that even with much information, decisions do not always follow a pattern.
True or false: Better knowledge yields better decision making.
True, again sometimes for the same reason above. However, I would rather have knowledge than information. Knowledge will have more context than just information. Knowledge is knowing what to do with information. Information alone is useless unless it is interpreted correctly.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Week 4 Article Summary
Week 4’s reading is focusing on personal knowledge management. I’m going to start with the first 2 articles on wikis. They are both fairly short and we briefly discussed wikis in class in week 3.
7 Things You Should Know About Wikis.
This article provides a good introduction to wikis. My first personal experience with wikis, as I’m sure is with many people, is Wikipedia. The article mentions that some students see it as a “reliable source of information.” I personally don’t think it is reliable. I took the IS Social Issues of Computing course and we talked quite extensively about Wikipedia and found many examples of how bad information can get into Wikipedia. With anyone able to edit content, the potential for inaccurate information should be kept in mind. Even with person monitoring the content changes, the amount of information out there is enormous and a task that certainly could not be perfect.
However, the upside of wikis can be enormous. At my work, we are just starting to use wikis to get information about meeting and other collaboration projects. I do find it useful to see meeting minutes published in real-time. I can make that the notes are accurate and not lose memory of the meeting by the time someone types up the notes and publishes at a later time. I do see great potential for wikis, but once people start to use them, I’m not sure they have much of a use past their current functionality.
Wiki Article from Spectrum IEEE – One Click Content, No Guarantees.
I really enjoyed this article. Two things stuck out to me. The first was that this type of collaboration leads to mediocrity and that Wikipedia is almost as accurate as Britannica.
So if in a group you have a couple of people with the right answer and a couple of people with the wrong answer, do you end with mediocrity? How can the editors of Wikipedia know what is right and what is wrong. I know someone how was trying to get update for her company into Wikipedia and the editors would not allow the changes. So if one person has great knowledge that is too much to validate, it will likely be thrown out. Therefore, I believe that you do get mediocrity in Wikipedia. It may not be wrong, but it also is probably not the most earth-shattering information either.
I was amazed that per science article, Wikipedia as an average of 4 mistakes, while Britannica has 3. First of all, that’s a lot of mistakes per article. Secondly, I would have thought Britannica to be much more accurate. Even with the relative newness of Wikipedia, people are monitoring content. I’m sure that errors in Britannica are reported, but the spirit of Wikipedia lends itself to more self-monitoring.
Personal Knowledge Networks Emerge with Grassroots – Caldwell – Gartner 2002
My first impression of this article is that it is a look into the future (which is today) from the past. The article makes some predictions about what the future of PKM will look like and does a pretty good job. It states that PKM will be used via PDA and desktops. PDA, with the iPhone and Blackberry, are very prevalent as we discussed with Ed Brill in class. They are helping people to get organized and communicate in ways we weren’t able to in the past. More and more people are telecommuting (again as Ed Brill pointed out in his presentation).
The article as makes the prediction that KM will shift from corporations to individuals. This is a very interesting concept that was also stated in the book, The World Is Flat, by Thomas Friedman. The book states that a shift in power has occurred from countries to corporations to individuals. With individuals being able to publish content for the world to see, I believe this concept is definitely coming true. Individuals like Ed Brill are blogging and producing content; thus personal knowledge management is growing.
Google has done a great job enabling people which PKM tools such as Google Desktop. In my mind, they are really leading the way in collaborative technology, and doing it at no cost to consumers. The article does predict this technology and I believe that it will be more widely used in the future as consumers see the value.
The Many Forms of E-Collaboration: Blogs, Wikis, Portal, Groupware, Discussion Boards, and Instant Messaging. Fichter.
Wow, what a sweater the author is wearing!!! That’s really something.
I really liked the opening part of the article that talked about if technology is always necessary. I run into this all the time. For the amount of effort that some software projects take, it is not always worth the time and money spent. Technical persons, from my experience, want to automate everything and sometimes it just doesn’t make sense. The author is correct; technology should only be a support, not the driver in many cases. We talked about this concept in the last class. Is technology leading change or supporting it? I believe that some technology does help to lead change, but that’s usually not the case.
Most of the ideas presented about the collaboration technologies are not new. I think most everyone in the corporate world has experience with the tools presented. As the author talks about, many companies do not allow IM. My company has banned it, but I really don’t think they should be as long as it is within the firewalls. Sometimes I think that the company just may not want to deal with the potential threats that technology could bring until someone finally pushes it. Ed Brill said he IMs all the time and IBM is probably on the cutting edge of making sure systems are secure. The author does make a good point that a company should do what it needs to and maybe most people in my company don’t need IM.
Personal Toolkit: A Framework for Personal Knowledge Management Tools. Barth.
This article really builds off the last one at the start. Do what makes sense and don’t do what doesn’t. Sound like the karma cliché, “do good things and good things will happen to you.” I really liked the opening sentence about “personal tools that can automate, accelerate, or augment human processes.” This again hits on the idea of does technology create change or does it support it. The article is talking about PKM, but this really applies to all technology. “Accelerating” change accurately describes the evolution of technology.
The thing that stuck out the most to me about the article was the non-technology aspects of the model. At the end of the last class we mapped out the different nodes of KM. This article really touches on many of the other aspects of KM. It talks about learning and other skills that are difficult to capture as information. The article presents ideas as a major component beyond just the information. I highlighted some of the words I liked that expressed KM in the article and they are; judgment, intuition, people to help you, experience, education, trends, relationships, patterns, decisions, recommendations, actions, experts, emotional, political, communities, leadership, listening, and thinking. This was my favorite article out of the readings for this week.
7 Things You Should Know About Wikis.
This article provides a good introduction to wikis. My first personal experience with wikis, as I’m sure is with many people, is Wikipedia. The article mentions that some students see it as a “reliable source of information.” I personally don’t think it is reliable. I took the IS Social Issues of Computing course and we talked quite extensively about Wikipedia and found many examples of how bad information can get into Wikipedia. With anyone able to edit content, the potential for inaccurate information should be kept in mind. Even with person monitoring the content changes, the amount of information out there is enormous and a task that certainly could not be perfect.
However, the upside of wikis can be enormous. At my work, we are just starting to use wikis to get information about meeting and other collaboration projects. I do find it useful to see meeting minutes published in real-time. I can make that the notes are accurate and not lose memory of the meeting by the time someone types up the notes and publishes at a later time. I do see great potential for wikis, but once people start to use them, I’m not sure they have much of a use past their current functionality.
Wiki Article from Spectrum IEEE – One Click Content, No Guarantees.
I really enjoyed this article. Two things stuck out to me. The first was that this type of collaboration leads to mediocrity and that Wikipedia is almost as accurate as Britannica.
So if in a group you have a couple of people with the right answer and a couple of people with the wrong answer, do you end with mediocrity? How can the editors of Wikipedia know what is right and what is wrong. I know someone how was trying to get update for her company into Wikipedia and the editors would not allow the changes. So if one person has great knowledge that is too much to validate, it will likely be thrown out. Therefore, I believe that you do get mediocrity in Wikipedia. It may not be wrong, but it also is probably not the most earth-shattering information either.
I was amazed that per science article, Wikipedia as an average of 4 mistakes, while Britannica has 3. First of all, that’s a lot of mistakes per article. Secondly, I would have thought Britannica to be much more accurate. Even with the relative newness of Wikipedia, people are monitoring content. I’m sure that errors in Britannica are reported, but the spirit of Wikipedia lends itself to more self-monitoring.
Personal Knowledge Networks Emerge with Grassroots – Caldwell – Gartner 2002
My first impression of this article is that it is a look into the future (which is today) from the past. The article makes some predictions about what the future of PKM will look like and does a pretty good job. It states that PKM will be used via PDA and desktops. PDA, with the iPhone and Blackberry, are very prevalent as we discussed with Ed Brill in class. They are helping people to get organized and communicate in ways we weren’t able to in the past. More and more people are telecommuting (again as Ed Brill pointed out in his presentation).
The article as makes the prediction that KM will shift from corporations to individuals. This is a very interesting concept that was also stated in the book, The World Is Flat, by Thomas Friedman. The book states that a shift in power has occurred from countries to corporations to individuals. With individuals being able to publish content for the world to see, I believe this concept is definitely coming true. Individuals like Ed Brill are blogging and producing content; thus personal knowledge management is growing.
Google has done a great job enabling people which PKM tools such as Google Desktop. In my mind, they are really leading the way in collaborative technology, and doing it at no cost to consumers. The article does predict this technology and I believe that it will be more widely used in the future as consumers see the value.
The Many Forms of E-Collaboration: Blogs, Wikis, Portal, Groupware, Discussion Boards, and Instant Messaging. Fichter.
Wow, what a sweater the author is wearing!!! That’s really something.
I really liked the opening part of the article that talked about if technology is always necessary. I run into this all the time. For the amount of effort that some software projects take, it is not always worth the time and money spent. Technical persons, from my experience, want to automate everything and sometimes it just doesn’t make sense. The author is correct; technology should only be a support, not the driver in many cases. We talked about this concept in the last class. Is technology leading change or supporting it? I believe that some technology does help to lead change, but that’s usually not the case.
Most of the ideas presented about the collaboration technologies are not new. I think most everyone in the corporate world has experience with the tools presented. As the author talks about, many companies do not allow IM. My company has banned it, but I really don’t think they should be as long as it is within the firewalls. Sometimes I think that the company just may not want to deal with the potential threats that technology could bring until someone finally pushes it. Ed Brill said he IMs all the time and IBM is probably on the cutting edge of making sure systems are secure. The author does make a good point that a company should do what it needs to and maybe most people in my company don’t need IM.
Personal Toolkit: A Framework for Personal Knowledge Management Tools. Barth.
This article really builds off the last one at the start. Do what makes sense and don’t do what doesn’t. Sound like the karma cliché, “do good things and good things will happen to you.” I really liked the opening sentence about “personal tools that can automate, accelerate, or augment human processes.” This again hits on the idea of does technology create change or does it support it. The article is talking about PKM, but this really applies to all technology. “Accelerating” change accurately describes the evolution of technology.
The thing that stuck out the most to me about the article was the non-technology aspects of the model. At the end of the last class we mapped out the different nodes of KM. This article really touches on many of the other aspects of KM. It talks about learning and other skills that are difficult to capture as information. The article presents ideas as a major component beyond just the information. I highlighted some of the words I liked that expressed KM in the article and they are; judgment, intuition, people to help you, experience, education, trends, relationships, patterns, decisions, recommendations, actions, experts, emotional, political, communities, leadership, listening, and thinking. This was my favorite article out of the readings for this week.
Ed Brill
Ed Brill
Ed Brill was a guest speaker in our class in week 3. I’ll have to say that he really impressed me. The introduction about him definitely made me respect his work. Having a blog that represents IBM is really impressive. His reader base instantly gives credence to his work.
One very interesting thing that he expressed was that technology is changing so rapidly, that whatever we learn today (for a purely technical perspective) will likely be out of date in a couple of years. I definitely believe this, but also think that the foundations that we learn and the way we learn are well worth the time. If we never learned anything because we were afraid that it would be out of date, then we would be in the wrong field. Changing technology is one of the most fascinating aspects of IT for me.
At the end of class after Ed had left, it was said that Ed has a very limited scope on his knowledge. I don’t know if I really believe that. Ed seemed to have great insight on where IT is going from my view. Sure, he focuses on Lotus Notes daily, but he talked about how technology is evolving and gave great insight.
Ed is probably my favorite guest speaker in a class. I do wonder if Lotus Notes is a “legacy” system, but the new version he showed us was much better than the older version my company used to use (we are now completely on Outlook). It will be interesting to see how Lotus is marketed in the future.
Ed Brill was a guest speaker in our class in week 3. I’ll have to say that he really impressed me. The introduction about him definitely made me respect his work. Having a blog that represents IBM is really impressive. His reader base instantly gives credence to his work.
One very interesting thing that he expressed was that technology is changing so rapidly, that whatever we learn today (for a purely technical perspective) will likely be out of date in a couple of years. I definitely believe this, but also think that the foundations that we learn and the way we learn are well worth the time. If we never learned anything because we were afraid that it would be out of date, then we would be in the wrong field. Changing technology is one of the most fascinating aspects of IT for me.
At the end of class after Ed had left, it was said that Ed has a very limited scope on his knowledge. I don’t know if I really believe that. Ed seemed to have great insight on where IT is going from my view. Sure, he focuses on Lotus Notes daily, but he talked about how technology is evolving and gave great insight.
Ed is probably my favorite guest speaker in a class. I do wonder if Lotus Notes is a “legacy” system, but the new version he showed us was much better than the older version my company used to use (we are now completely on Outlook). It will be interesting to see how Lotus is marketed in the future.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Truth or Knowledge???? I'll take the Truth
In week 2 of class, the question was raised, "Which would you rather have, truth or knowledge?" Tough question, to me it depends on the definition. I'll have to say that I'm not entirely clear, so let me talk through this question starting with definitions.
Merriam-Webster defines knowledge as....
"the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association"
and truth as....
"a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true"
I believe that knowledge is knowing something regardless of it is true or not. For example, I do not have a dog. Knowledge would be that I might have a dog, but truth would say I do not.
Therefore, I would rather have truth than knowledge. With so much unreliable information available today, knowing what is true versus everything available is vastly different. I really only want to know what is true.
Knowledge of everything is helpful, but knowing the truth is relevant.
Merriam-Webster defines knowledge as....
"the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association"
and truth as....
"a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true"
I believe that knowledge is knowing something regardless of it is true or not. For example, I do not have a dog. Knowledge would be that I might have a dog, but truth would say I do not.
Therefore, I would rather have truth than knowledge. With so much unreliable information available today, knowing what is true versus everything available is vastly different. I really only want to know what is true.
Knowledge of everything is helpful, but knowing the truth is relevant.
Week 2 Article Summary
For Week 2, there are 2 sets of notes to blog about. I’ll blog about them in no particular order, except to do the Alvari article first which perked my interest when we discussed in class. Also, after the all the articles for this week, I will tackle the blog questions posed in class, “Which would you rather have, Truth or Knowledge?” in a separate blog entry. I’m hoping that reading some of the articles will give me some insight.
Alvari – 2001 – Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.
One interesting thing about the article was that it brought up “universal truth” and said it would not tackle it. So much for getting more background on the blog question of truth versus knowledge.
The article also reviewed at the beginning much of the lecture of data, information, and knowledge that reinforces what we discussed in class. It challenges that knowledge exist before data or information. As in the diagram in class showing how knowledge flows to information, it again states that information is knowledge articulated. It also presents other alternate views of what KM and acknowledges at with so much information in the world today, much information is of little or no values (what about my blog???...hopefully is it serving a purpose).
Again, as in the first week’s articles, tacit versus explicit knowledge are detailed (I blogged extensively on the concepts in week 1). However, this article was a great chart that takes knowledge perspectives further in a easy to compare table. It presents knowledge as many different things…an object, a process, a capability, etc. To me, these are all valid perspectives and it is interesting to see the contrast. Traditionally, I have thought of knowledge as an object. I relate to all of these, but “state of mind” is the most out there to me. I understand it, but would never have expressed it that way.
There are many other concepts presented in the article. I found the organizational memory described as semantic or episodic to be fascinating. Semantic is general knowledge and episodic memory is more specific to decisions. Memory has an influence on knowledge of individuals and organizations, both positive and negative. Different factors have different impacts on how knowledge is obtained and applies.
Many other concepts where presented including knowledge creation and how technology is helping and impacting knowledge.
Bohn – Measuring and Managing Technological Knowledge
The stages of knowledge presented in this article start with having no knowledge to having complete knowledge. I personally think the all persons and organizations are somewhere in the middle and at different stages at different times. Some knowledge of an organization is purely at an awareness level. If it is in “complete ignorance” then it probably doesn’t matter to the firm. Some of he later stages are pretty far-fetched for most companies. Formulas and algorithms are likely in few scientific organizations. Most companies however do have manuals and procedures.
I did like the charge that had the scale showing the different stages and behaviors associated. The higher the stage, the more formal knowledge is applied, stored, and managed. However, I do think that certain industries and companies are better suited to have a higher level of knowledge.
Currently, my company is using CMMI certification to obtain higher levels of knowledge. It is interesting that QUALITY and KNOWLEDGE seem to be closely linked. This link was my “revelation” for this article.
Definitions – Notes on Information and Knowledge by A Burns
We have used these notes in class and they are a great summarization of the basic concepts we have covered so far. Data, Information, knowledge, wisdom, expertise, and truth have some interesting definitions. Information has one, “Objective Truth”, that I will use in the blog question about truth versus knowledge.
The scope of knowledge as an object is new to me. I think some of the articles to come will help give me more information. Tact versus Explicit is here again. I really do think this to be the major hurtle in KM. Also, the many scales is the theme from the Bohn article. Everything including knowledge has different levels.
Nonaka – 1991 – The Knowledge-Creating Company
From the start, it is clear that Nonaka is challenging that knowledge is created and that it is not discovered. The article also says that Japanese companies start managing knowledge from the center of their human resources. I don’t completely agree that Japanese manufacturing and has the article states, Japanese knowledge are the best. The article to me is biased, but makes very good points.
As with the other articles, Nonaka describes tacit versus explicit knowledge. However, he goes further to say that it is not all that difficult to exchange tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge and vise versa. I believe that articulating tacit knowledge is much more difficult that he explains. Making bread is not the most difficult thing to do and therefore, his example may be okay with simple items.
Being innovative does involve knowledge, but tacit knowledge is not easily learned. I really think that it is the corporate cultural and individuals that help create knowledge. Working in the banking industry, many times change is slow, but the culture is that way. Changing the culture of a company will lead to different outcomes.
His use of “metaphor”, “analogy”, and “model” are really talking again about the culture and how change is handled. This article definitely draws a connection between change management and knowledge management.
CFO – It’s who you know and that’s why we use acronyms
This is a short little article, but does touch on one idea that I had not blogged about from week 1, that is network versus repository. Repository seeks to put everything in a database while network will just use search engines to find information in various forms. Personally, I like the network model and think that many systems should and are trying to make be a hybrid. Data can be found using a network approach, but certain mediums like video, need to have proper tags. I think that a repository approach to cataloging data while using network approach to expand past the borders of a traditional database may be the best approach.
The article also claims that expertise should not be bottled, but find it when you need it…the network approach. I agree, but some effort needs to be made to make sure information is stored properly.
The amount of information available is overwhelming. Over 70 million hours of radio recorded last year is incomprehensible. Trying to find what you need on the internet is only easy sometimes. The amount of data is only getting bigger, so companies like Google are going to be even more critical in the future.
Notes from Chapter 2 - Knowledge-Engineering Basics
Knowledge Engineering and Management: The CommonKADS Methodology
by Guus Schreiber et al.
This is excerpts from an online book about Knowledge Engineering and Management. Many of the topics from the article are highlighted here. Modeling and processing information create problems and solutions. The chapter also gives good roles associated with KM.
Knowledge Elicitation is a fascinating topic for me. I work primarily requirements management and we elicit requirements from stakeholders. The techniques for knowledge elicitation are the same as in requirements.
So in the articles from today, I have seen a connection between KM and Change Management and Requirements Management. The common theme being management. I am definitely going to try to find as many connections between KM and my personal knowledge of other fields of study.
That’s it for articles this week. The only other materials in the materials for week 2 are powerpoints. I really didn’t get the knowledge of truth versus knowledge for the blog question, so looks like I’ll poke around the internet a bit before blogging about it.
Alvari – 2001 – Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.
One interesting thing about the article was that it brought up “universal truth” and said it would not tackle it. So much for getting more background on the blog question of truth versus knowledge.
The article also reviewed at the beginning much of the lecture of data, information, and knowledge that reinforces what we discussed in class. It challenges that knowledge exist before data or information. As in the diagram in class showing how knowledge flows to information, it again states that information is knowledge articulated. It also presents other alternate views of what KM and acknowledges at with so much information in the world today, much information is of little or no values (what about my blog???...hopefully is it serving a purpose).
Again, as in the first week’s articles, tacit versus explicit knowledge are detailed (I blogged extensively on the concepts in week 1). However, this article was a great chart that takes knowledge perspectives further in a easy to compare table. It presents knowledge as many different things…an object, a process, a capability, etc. To me, these are all valid perspectives and it is interesting to see the contrast. Traditionally, I have thought of knowledge as an object. I relate to all of these, but “state of mind” is the most out there to me. I understand it, but would never have expressed it that way.
There are many other concepts presented in the article. I found the organizational memory described as semantic or episodic to be fascinating. Semantic is general knowledge and episodic memory is more specific to decisions. Memory has an influence on knowledge of individuals and organizations, both positive and negative. Different factors have different impacts on how knowledge is obtained and applies.
Many other concepts where presented including knowledge creation and how technology is helping and impacting knowledge.
Bohn – Measuring and Managing Technological Knowledge
The stages of knowledge presented in this article start with having no knowledge to having complete knowledge. I personally think the all persons and organizations are somewhere in the middle and at different stages at different times. Some knowledge of an organization is purely at an awareness level. If it is in “complete ignorance” then it probably doesn’t matter to the firm. Some of he later stages are pretty far-fetched for most companies. Formulas and algorithms are likely in few scientific organizations. Most companies however do have manuals and procedures.
I did like the charge that had the scale showing the different stages and behaviors associated. The higher the stage, the more formal knowledge is applied, stored, and managed. However, I do think that certain industries and companies are better suited to have a higher level of knowledge.
Currently, my company is using CMMI certification to obtain higher levels of knowledge. It is interesting that QUALITY and KNOWLEDGE seem to be closely linked. This link was my “revelation” for this article.
Definitions – Notes on Information and Knowledge by A Burns
We have used these notes in class and they are a great summarization of the basic concepts we have covered so far. Data, Information, knowledge, wisdom, expertise, and truth have some interesting definitions. Information has one, “Objective Truth”, that I will use in the blog question about truth versus knowledge.
The scope of knowledge as an object is new to me. I think some of the articles to come will help give me more information. Tact versus Explicit is here again. I really do think this to be the major hurtle in KM. Also, the many scales is the theme from the Bohn article. Everything including knowledge has different levels.
Nonaka – 1991 – The Knowledge-Creating Company
From the start, it is clear that Nonaka is challenging that knowledge is created and that it is not discovered. The article also says that Japanese companies start managing knowledge from the center of their human resources. I don’t completely agree that Japanese manufacturing and has the article states, Japanese knowledge are the best. The article to me is biased, but makes very good points.
As with the other articles, Nonaka describes tacit versus explicit knowledge. However, he goes further to say that it is not all that difficult to exchange tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge and vise versa. I believe that articulating tacit knowledge is much more difficult that he explains. Making bread is not the most difficult thing to do and therefore, his example may be okay with simple items.
Being innovative does involve knowledge, but tacit knowledge is not easily learned. I really think that it is the corporate cultural and individuals that help create knowledge. Working in the banking industry, many times change is slow, but the culture is that way. Changing the culture of a company will lead to different outcomes.
His use of “metaphor”, “analogy”, and “model” are really talking again about the culture and how change is handled. This article definitely draws a connection between change management and knowledge management.
CFO – It’s who you know and that’s why we use acronyms
This is a short little article, but does touch on one idea that I had not blogged about from week 1, that is network versus repository. Repository seeks to put everything in a database while network will just use search engines to find information in various forms. Personally, I like the network model and think that many systems should and are trying to make be a hybrid. Data can be found using a network approach, but certain mediums like video, need to have proper tags. I think that a repository approach to cataloging data while using network approach to expand past the borders of a traditional database may be the best approach.
The article also claims that expertise should not be bottled, but find it when you need it…the network approach. I agree, but some effort needs to be made to make sure information is stored properly.
The amount of information available is overwhelming. Over 70 million hours of radio recorded last year is incomprehensible. Trying to find what you need on the internet is only easy sometimes. The amount of data is only getting bigger, so companies like Google are going to be even more critical in the future.
Notes from Chapter 2 - Knowledge-Engineering Basics
Knowledge Engineering and Management: The CommonKADS Methodology
by Guus Schreiber et al.
This is excerpts from an online book about Knowledge Engineering and Management. Many of the topics from the article are highlighted here. Modeling and processing information create problems and solutions. The chapter also gives good roles associated with KM.
Knowledge Elicitation is a fascinating topic for me. I work primarily requirements management and we elicit requirements from stakeholders. The techniques for knowledge elicitation are the same as in requirements.
So in the articles from today, I have seen a connection between KM and Change Management and Requirements Management. The common theme being management. I am definitely going to try to find as many connections between KM and my personal knowledge of other fields of study.
That’s it for articles this week. The only other materials in the materials for week 2 are powerpoints. I really didn’t get the knowledge of truth versus knowledge for the blog question, so looks like I’ll poke around the internet a bit before blogging about it.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Week 1 Article Summary
Since this is my first blog about the weekly articles, I’ll briefly explain the method to my madness. I will read the articles and blog while reading. I might read sections or the whole article then start blogging my thoughts.
Per the first class, I am reading the Steve Jobs graduation article first. It sounds interesting and I’ve not read it before. From there, I’ll see if I can pick the most generic articles on KM. I’ll bold the article titles to show the breaks in the articles.
Stay Hungry – Steve Jobs Commencement Address
“Connecting the Dots”
I really enjoyed reading the first story about connecting the dots. Steve Jobs is one of the people that admire the most. I did not realize how Steve had basically just popped into classes and took a calligraphy class that basically set the tone for the Mac. Since Macs are much more of a creative system than PCs, it is very interesting to see how they got started.
The morale of the story is about how you cannot connect the dots looking forward, only back. I find that very inspiring, but at the same time not always accurate. You can definitely connect the dots looking backwards, but should always be looking forward. That would be like saying that after completing my graduate degree, I would only look back to see what I did. I think that by taking certain actions, you can set how your future will turn out and “connect the dots” something happens.
“Love and Loss”
It is very ironic that Jobs got fired from Apple and started two other companies that got bought out by Apple and he got his job back. I don’t think this would happen to most people, but his message about sticking with something you love and not giving up will lead to good things for those inspired. If you really do love something, you should never give it up, even if certain doors are closed. You have to learn from your mistakes and give it another shot.
“Death”
“Death is very likely the single greatest invention of Life”….Wow. How true, but again, how ironic. I agree with Jobs, but also think that you cannot live your life in fear of death. Making changes if things are going how you would like them to is very difficult for most people. I have tried to better myself when I get in a rut…but sometime it seems that you have to just stick certain things out to get to how you want some things to end.
Jobs is very inspiring (I think that is the 3rd time using that word about him). I really enjoyed this speech and will be looking for more words of wisdom from him.
Harris – One More Time: What is Knowledge Management
I thought this would be a good article to read second. Professor Burns said that it really was not that well of a written article, but had it looked like a good foundation.
The in week 1 lecture intellectual property was discussed. The article states that organizational capital is most commonly captured in KM. I would describe that best as the artifacts produced in the course of business.
Much definition was put around KM, but one of the most interesting facts I found about the article was that when KM is intertwined with other systems, it is most effective. When applications are built upon one another, they can be very powerful, but also very expensive to maintain. I believe that one of the main reasons that KM is limited is the expense. Realizing the benefits to centralizing knowledge is the key to making a case for KM.
I know that I am simplifying KM and the article goes on to state that KM can extend to all aspects of business. It also says that KM may not be a good term. However, I do believe as the article suggests that the ROI of KM is the ultimate reason to implement such sytems.
Bowman – Building Knowledge Management Systems
I really liked the one definition of KM systems on the second page of the article: “enable employees to retrieve information needed to perform their work tasks”. While simplest, it is the essence of what a KM system must do. It can make the tasks easier or do a variety of other things, but ultimately workers need information to do their jobs.
This article also talks about tactic knowledge, as did the first article, and acknowledges that this is the most difficult information to capture. I’m not sure the answer to how to do this, but clearly this looks to be one of the major challenges without a good answer. How would you capture something that is in someone’s head???
Technologies discussed in the article look dated and in fact, the date of the article is summer 2002. Most of the underlying principals look to still be used such as queries and search engines, but KM tools such as SharePoint are way ahead of the article.
Casonato – Glossary of Terms
This is a good reference article defining terms used in KM. The foreword of the article is interesting stating the three reasons terms have changed. Again, intellectual capital is mentioned. Virtual workplaces are also changing dynamics. I have noticed in my workplace that we are increasingly using remote labor, whether on-shore or off-shore.
The terms are fairly common and I’ve seen most. One that I had not heard before was “microcontent”. I buy microcontent all the time, mainly songs on iTunes, but had never heard the term. I am interested to see how it relates to KM.
Knova – Whitepaper – Ten Principals for Knowledge Management
The word whitepaper makes me cringe. To me it means this is just a boring paper so read if you have to have the information, otherwise it is better suited for a shelf. I’m writing this before reading the article to see if my theory holds water.
My first impression of the whitepaper was I noticed many buzz words to describe KM: practice, discipline, cultural buy-in, champion, etc. However, the one thing that I learned from the article was that KM can not only benefit a company, but its clients and customers. I guess I knew that, but it took me out of my box and expanded my thoughts to the benefits extending beyond an organization. In my work, we rarely use SharePoint to benefit our end-users. Contractors use it, but that’s the extent of using it beyond our walls.
Most of the rest of the article was informative, but I did not have any revelations. Change management was discussed in the first class and again in this article. Obviously any new application/methodology/etc. will need have change managed. I also liked the concept of starting small and expanding. This is commonly how things get done from my experience. Create a pilot to see if something makes sense and then tweak it before rolling it out to the masses.
Barton - Performance Management
Well, this was the largest file in the zip file for this week; however, it is really a presentation with many pictures and diagrams but little text compared to the file size. I immediately got a bad taste when I found it was talking about financial management. I then read on to find that it is really talking about automation which I can relate to. It is really a sales tool that targets companies using spreadsheets and ad hoc reporting.
Slide 13 talks about the big 3, People, Process, and Technology. These are the basic building blocks of how business work today. Some have more of one than the other. The trend is pushing to using technology with process and away from people.
I know that our company spends time and effort collecting and analyzing data. We are constantly trying to automate these tasks, but the constant changes to software and processes makes the integration of all systems very, very difficult. The sales pitch claims to be able to help integrate data at a lower price than an ERP, which I’m sure it can but may lack architecture of an ERP. Changing systems and people will likely prove it to be a headache in my opinion.
Pollard – The Future of Knowledge
Being new to KM, I had never thought of the creators of KM as right-brained or creative as the beginning of the article elaborates. It makes sense, but from an IT background, I think or maybe I should say thought of KM as more technology based. The article states that many are HR or marketing based but as they evolve, they are better suited in the IT department. It challenges that this is not the best practice and that IT workers are not the most creative minds (which I believe to be true with many IT persons).
The article states that ROI on KM systems is either “unmeasurable” or “unsatisfactory”. It states that the most successful qualities are innate or as the couple of articles in this blog refers to as tactic. The other concept that has reared it head it cultural change or change management. These two factors look to be the largest stumbling blocks in KM.
Several options are given to help improve KM in organizations. It is really ingraining the KM into the organization and overcoming the two obsolesces of capturing tactic knowledge and successfully implementing cultural change.
Per the first class, I am reading the Steve Jobs graduation article first. It sounds interesting and I’ve not read it before. From there, I’ll see if I can pick the most generic articles on KM. I’ll bold the article titles to show the breaks in the articles.
Stay Hungry – Steve Jobs Commencement Address
“Connecting the Dots”
I really enjoyed reading the first story about connecting the dots. Steve Jobs is one of the people that admire the most. I did not realize how Steve had basically just popped into classes and took a calligraphy class that basically set the tone for the Mac. Since Macs are much more of a creative system than PCs, it is very interesting to see how they got started.
The morale of the story is about how you cannot connect the dots looking forward, only back. I find that very inspiring, but at the same time not always accurate. You can definitely connect the dots looking backwards, but should always be looking forward. That would be like saying that after completing my graduate degree, I would only look back to see what I did. I think that by taking certain actions, you can set how your future will turn out and “connect the dots” something happens.
“Love and Loss”
It is very ironic that Jobs got fired from Apple and started two other companies that got bought out by Apple and he got his job back. I don’t think this would happen to most people, but his message about sticking with something you love and not giving up will lead to good things for those inspired. If you really do love something, you should never give it up, even if certain doors are closed. You have to learn from your mistakes and give it another shot.
“Death”
“Death is very likely the single greatest invention of Life”….Wow. How true, but again, how ironic. I agree with Jobs, but also think that you cannot live your life in fear of death. Making changes if things are going how you would like them to is very difficult for most people. I have tried to better myself when I get in a rut…but sometime it seems that you have to just stick certain things out to get to how you want some things to end.
Jobs is very inspiring (I think that is the 3rd time using that word about him). I really enjoyed this speech and will be looking for more words of wisdom from him.
Harris – One More Time: What is Knowledge Management
I thought this would be a good article to read second. Professor Burns said that it really was not that well of a written article, but had it looked like a good foundation.
The in week 1 lecture intellectual property was discussed. The article states that organizational capital is most commonly captured in KM. I would describe that best as the artifacts produced in the course of business.
Much definition was put around KM, but one of the most interesting facts I found about the article was that when KM is intertwined with other systems, it is most effective. When applications are built upon one another, they can be very powerful, but also very expensive to maintain. I believe that one of the main reasons that KM is limited is the expense. Realizing the benefits to centralizing knowledge is the key to making a case for KM.
I know that I am simplifying KM and the article goes on to state that KM can extend to all aspects of business. It also says that KM may not be a good term. However, I do believe as the article suggests that the ROI of KM is the ultimate reason to implement such sytems.
Bowman – Building Knowledge Management Systems
I really liked the one definition of KM systems on the second page of the article: “enable employees to retrieve information needed to perform their work tasks”. While simplest, it is the essence of what a KM system must do. It can make the tasks easier or do a variety of other things, but ultimately workers need information to do their jobs.
This article also talks about tactic knowledge, as did the first article, and acknowledges that this is the most difficult information to capture. I’m not sure the answer to how to do this, but clearly this looks to be one of the major challenges without a good answer. How would you capture something that is in someone’s head???
Technologies discussed in the article look dated and in fact, the date of the article is summer 2002. Most of the underlying principals look to still be used such as queries and search engines, but KM tools such as SharePoint are way ahead of the article.
Casonato – Glossary of Terms
This is a good reference article defining terms used in KM. The foreword of the article is interesting stating the three reasons terms have changed. Again, intellectual capital is mentioned. Virtual workplaces are also changing dynamics. I have noticed in my workplace that we are increasingly using remote labor, whether on-shore or off-shore.
The terms are fairly common and I’ve seen most. One that I had not heard before was “microcontent”. I buy microcontent all the time, mainly songs on iTunes, but had never heard the term. I am interested to see how it relates to KM.
Knova – Whitepaper – Ten Principals for Knowledge Management
The word whitepaper makes me cringe. To me it means this is just a boring paper so read if you have to have the information, otherwise it is better suited for a shelf. I’m writing this before reading the article to see if my theory holds water.
My first impression of the whitepaper was I noticed many buzz words to describe KM: practice, discipline, cultural buy-in, champion, etc. However, the one thing that I learned from the article was that KM can not only benefit a company, but its clients and customers. I guess I knew that, but it took me out of my box and expanded my thoughts to the benefits extending beyond an organization. In my work, we rarely use SharePoint to benefit our end-users. Contractors use it, but that’s the extent of using it beyond our walls.
Most of the rest of the article was informative, but I did not have any revelations. Change management was discussed in the first class and again in this article. Obviously any new application/methodology/etc. will need have change managed. I also liked the concept of starting small and expanding. This is commonly how things get done from my experience. Create a pilot to see if something makes sense and then tweak it before rolling it out to the masses.
Barton - Performance Management
Well, this was the largest file in the zip file for this week; however, it is really a presentation with many pictures and diagrams but little text compared to the file size. I immediately got a bad taste when I found it was talking about financial management. I then read on to find that it is really talking about automation which I can relate to. It is really a sales tool that targets companies using spreadsheets and ad hoc reporting.
Slide 13 talks about the big 3, People, Process, and Technology. These are the basic building blocks of how business work today. Some have more of one than the other. The trend is pushing to using technology with process and away from people.
I know that our company spends time and effort collecting and analyzing data. We are constantly trying to automate these tasks, but the constant changes to software and processes makes the integration of all systems very, very difficult. The sales pitch claims to be able to help integrate data at a lower price than an ERP, which I’m sure it can but may lack architecture of an ERP. Changing systems and people will likely prove it to be a headache in my opinion.
Pollard – The Future of Knowledge
Being new to KM, I had never thought of the creators of KM as right-brained or creative as the beginning of the article elaborates. It makes sense, but from an IT background, I think or maybe I should say thought of KM as more technology based. The article states that many are HR or marketing based but as they evolve, they are better suited in the IT department. It challenges that this is not the best practice and that IT workers are not the most creative minds (which I believe to be true with many IT persons).
The article states that ROI on KM systems is either “unmeasurable” or “unsatisfactory”. It states that the most successful qualities are innate or as the couple of articles in this blog refers to as tactic. The other concept that has reared it head it cultural change or change management. These two factors look to be the largest stumbling blocks in KM.
Several options are given to help improve KM in organizations. It is really ingraining the KM into the organization and overcoming the two obsolesces of capturing tactic knowledge and successfully implementing cultural change.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Hello IS 456
Hello, IS 456!
This is my first blog and an introduction to who I am and my experience with Knowledge Management.
My name is Tony Pyatt. I am an IS graduate student taking my last class for my master's degree, Knowledge Management Systems. I am taking the online option for the course with mixed feelings. This is my first online course and enjoying attending class in-person. However, I have a very busy spring and will miss several classes; thus taking the online section.
My background in Knowledge Management dates back to around the year 2000 when I started a job with Accenture. They have/had an extensive knowledge management network based on a Lotus Notes database. I have long since left Accenture, but at the time I used it from 2000 to 2001, it was very helpful to me to find documents that other consultants have published.
Currently, I work for a bank and extensively use SharePoint for all projects. It stores most all project related information and documents. I am not sure that we always get the full benefits that SharePoint could provide, but it is much better than repositories that we used years ago. One of the major benefits that I like about SharePoint is the document sharing and checkout. The thing I most dislike is that it is often difficult to find what I'm looking for. Persons almost need to know where to look to find something. Search capabilities are good as long as you know what your looking for.
I will be posting weekly posts per course requirements on my thoughts on the articles presented. Hopefully I can make this blog fun to read while learning.
This is my first blog and an introduction to who I am and my experience with Knowledge Management.
My name is Tony Pyatt. I am an IS graduate student taking my last class for my master's degree, Knowledge Management Systems. I am taking the online option for the course with mixed feelings. This is my first online course and enjoying attending class in-person. However, I have a very busy spring and will miss several classes; thus taking the online section.
My background in Knowledge Management dates back to around the year 2000 when I started a job with Accenture. They have/had an extensive knowledge management network based on a Lotus Notes database. I have long since left Accenture, but at the time I used it from 2000 to 2001, it was very helpful to me to find documents that other consultants have published.
Currently, I work for a bank and extensively use SharePoint for all projects. It stores most all project related information and documents. I am not sure that we always get the full benefits that SharePoint could provide, but it is much better than repositories that we used years ago. One of the major benefits that I like about SharePoint is the document sharing and checkout. The thing I most dislike is that it is often difficult to find what I'm looking for. Persons almost need to know where to look to find something. Search capabilities are good as long as you know what your looking for.
I will be posting weekly posts per course requirements on my thoughts on the articles presented. Hopefully I can make this blog fun to read while learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)