Given the “soft benefits” of KM, it may be hard to actually quantify the
full cost of ownership. Nonetheless, knowlege mangers are not off the
hook. We just have to work harder to be sure we have a defensible way of
explaining and substantiating the costs and benefits of KM. But even if we
can't nail down every last item, I suspect that simply making the effort
will prove beneficial.

- Mary

This sounds simple, but especially with KM, there are often a lot of soft benefits that are hard to quantify. Though we try, there are many assumptions compiled that rarely are accurate. Many initiatives in a large organization will claim that they will cause or caused the same benefits.

Nonetheless, we should always strive to quantify costs and benefits the best we can.

You're right that a fixed fee billing structure makes the benefits of model
documents more intuitively obvious. Nonetheless, my point about checking
premises remains. We won't know for sure that a model has been helpful
unless we can actually identify and measure the impact of that model.
Alternatively, we'll need solid and consistent anecdotal evidence that a
particular model was helpful. Are firms ready to do that kind of due
diligence review?

- Mary

True. Model documents are expensive. Even worse, they have a negative ROI when you are billing by the hour. If the model saves you a hour (or more) of drafting that is time that will not appear on the bill. (I will ignore collect-ability and quality since they are not meaningfully measurable.)

Switch to fixed billing and flat fees, then the investment in form documents is truly an investment that can yield a measurable financial return. That hour (or more) of drafting time saved makes the engagement that much more profitable for the firm.