Be Agile Not Fragile #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Description: To be agile in knowledge management, and to innovate, Garfield suggests the following principles: identify three key business objectives, focus more on helping people use processes effectively, improve decisions, actions, and learning, connect people to each other so they can help each other at the time of need, implement, improve, and iterate. To avoid being fragile, steer clear of these traps: maturity models, best practices, metrics for the sake of metrics, certification, tool rollout and adoption, personality tests, corporate speak and more! Sure to spark an interesting discussion so don’t miss this session.

Speaker: Stan Garfield, Knowledge Manager, Author Implementing a Successful KM Programme; Founder, SIKM Leaders Community

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Fragile things typically are:
    • Large
    • Overly optimized — they are too smart for their own good; they are obsessed with standardization and efficiency
      • this works if everything goes according to plan
      • BUT things rarely go exactly according to plan — Randomness is the Rule (not the exception) — in the face of random errors or problems, the fragile system cannot cope with the variability
    • Brittle — they don’t have the innate ability to fend off stress
  • Fragilistas:  these are people who try to eliminate volatility.
    • Helicopter parents try to make life as safe as possible for their children but in the process they deprive their children of the ability to learn how to cope with variability and randomness.
  • How to avoid becoming a Fragilista? Avoid these behaviors
    • Maturity models and benchmarking: it’s good to learn from others but don’t try to conform to a rigid model.
      • Seth Godin: “Benchmarking against the universe actually encourages us to be mediocre, to be average, to just do what everyone else is doing.”
    • Best Practices suggest that the ideal has been achieved. Rather it’s better to look for (and then adapt for your context) “proven practices” that fit your environment.
    • Metrics for the sake of metrics — avoid tracking every random thing. Make sure there is a business reason for tracking something.
    • Certification — taking a one-week class in KM is not enough to be a KM expert. Focus on learning not on certification.
    • Tool Rollout and Adoption — don’t fixate on rolling out tools and then “driving” adoption. The better approach is to start with understanding the needs of the organization rather than finding a use for the tool you have purchased.
    • Personality Tests — each person is unique, not an oversimplified archetype. Why do we need this categorization? What is the practical use?
    • Corporate Speak — don’t use buzzwords, insider jargon, or corporate lingo. Refuse to use them —  use words and expressions that are widely understood if your intent is to communicate clearly.
    • Do as I say, not as I do — you must practice what you preach.  Your senior management must lead by example. (And the KM team must lead by example too.) People will closely observe the actions of leaders and mimic them. Therefore, model the desired behaviors.
    • Secrecy — don’t give lip service to transparency while continuing to operate in a closed manner. Communicate frequently, truthfully, and openly.
    • Mediocracy — man organizations have leaders have little (if any) talent and skill who nevertheless are dominant and highly influential. Leaders should serve their people and  treat them with respect.
  • Unfragile behaviors
    • people can’t find information
    • People are reluctant to ask for help in public
    • organizations want to push information out
  • How to Move from fragile to agile?
    • Make content easy to find
      • let users tag content to indicate “I reused this document” or “I found this document helpful”
      • figure out what documents are most important to your organization and force those to the top of the search results
    • Assist people when they ask for help
      • make it easy to figure out where to ask a question
      • train people to ask questions in community spaces
    • Use the power of pull
      • don’t force content on others
      • make your content/tool so attractive that people are eager to opt in
  • What would a “self-healing” KM system look like? (Question from Christian de Nef)
    • Simplicity
    • Mobility — easy to switch from one platform to another
    • Knowledge systems that do not rely on technology
Share

Innovation Through KM, Process, & Quality #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Description: KM is but one of the legs that comprise the tripod of an innovation framework. The other two legs are efficient processes and a culture of quality. The need for this triumvirate is focus. Generally, to be successful, KM strategies must be planned and executed in steps. These steps require that KM be introduced through projects both to show progress as well as to limit the impact on an organization’s resources at one time. That’s where process comes into play. as specific processes must be targeted for improvement. The techniques of process improvement enable the focus needed to choose KM projects that are endorsed and supported by senior leadership. The final element of the innovation tripod—a culture of quality—means that the measurement of KM results is expected and conducted.

Speaker: Jim Lee, Sr. Vice-President, Knowledge Management Director, Fulton Financial Corporation

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Who are KM’s best allies?  
    • Scientific Management — Frederick Taylor
    • Project Management — Henry Gantt
    • Quality Management — Walter Shewhart
  • This is how KM, Process, and Quality play together to move the business forward:
    • WHY — the business objective, outputs, outcomes of your process or activities
    • WHERE — quality management thinking and measurement do this — how can KM help?
    • WHAT — process improvement focuses us on this — how can KM help?
    • WHEN — the process map tells us when something is to be done
    • WHO — knowledge management uncovers who is best for a project or for a question
    • HOW — best practices are forms of knowledge embedded in the process
  • Real Innovation: it requires seamless cooperation among KM, process management, and quality management.
Share

Future-Proofing Organizations #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Description:  As our world continues to change at a rapid pace and take unexpected turns, our organizations have to be prepared to deal with what’s coming next even if it is unanticipated. Our popular speaker shares his strategies for future-proofing your organization.

Speakers: Dave Snowden, Director, Cynefin Centre, Bangor University, Wales Cognitive Edge

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • What’s the Current State? 
    • We are suffering a modern malaise — too many years of struggling to fit the complexity of life into the simplified, engineering view of the world dictated by systems thinking.
    • We have used tools like Myers-Briggs that contrive to squash and flatten people so they fit into predefined boxes. Snowden ran a controlled experiment at IBM that established that astrology was a more reliable way of staff identification and team assignments than Myers-Brigg.
    • Techno-fetishism
      • The Nonaka Model launched thousands of failed KM initiatives.
      • The reduction of an artisan process to a simple methodology. The latest version of this is design thinking. You cannot master artisan processes in a two-day workshop.  It takes 2-3 years for the brain and body to co-evolve to the point that we can drive and talk at the same time. It takes 3-4 years for the brain and body to co-evolve sufficiently to apply expert knowledge. This is why apprenticeship is such an effective approach.
    • The false dichotomy of Order and Chaos. Despots throughout history have created or exploited chaos so that they can appear like heroes who promise (and occasionally deliver) order. We should adopt a more nuanced, less Manichean view of the world.
    • The Cult of Measurement. Six Sigma is a cult — its priests have different colored belts. Black belts do no real work because their job is to impose cult discipline.
      • PROBLEM: Whenever people are working for explicit rewards (e.g., measurements), this destroys intrinsic motivation.
    • The Intolerance of Deviance — HR departments create norms of how we should be. However, people are natural deviants. Yet we are forced to adhere to a particular view of how we should be.
    • The Obsession with the Strong Leader. This obsession ignores the fact that we work best with distributed leadership where different people contribute their unique talents and judgment.
    • The Anglo-Saxon Malaise: this is related to our over-emphasis on the individual. Yet we work best in communities.
    • The Tyranny of the Herds. The principle of democracy is that people should make individual decisions and those decisions collectively produce the wisdom of the crowds. However, if you permit opinion polls, then people start gaming the system and produce the tyranny of the herd. (He asserts that opinion polling should be banned during election season.)
      • Crowdsourcing is NOT the wisdom of the crowds.
    • The Naturalistic Fallacy — David Hume teaches that you should never derive an “ought” from an “is.” Just because you want it does not mean you should have it.
  • When to try novel solutions?
    • Start by asking: Where is the ecosystem? What stage is it at?
      • Snowden maps Geoffrey Moore’s Crossing the Chasm with S-Curve theory.
    • Dominant Predator Theory
      • During a period of dominance of a standard methodology, your best bet is to conform.
      • Once you see that the dominant predator, the standard methodology is not working so well anymore , then you have an opportunity to try something new because the old way is no longer reliable.
        • Six Sigma developed to try to wring efficiencies out of an old manufacturing system. Therefore, you should look for new manufacturing methods.
    • Past competency stops us from seeing future novelty.
      • We see only that which we are trained to see.
      • Drew, Vo & Wolfe published a study in 2013 that reported when 24 radiologists were asked to interpret a scan, 83% of them failed to notice the seriously enlarged picture of a gorilla inserted into the scan. Even those who looked directly at the gorilla did not realize they were looking at a very large picture of a gorilla. They saw only what they were trained to look for.
  • The Issues with Case-Based Evidence.
    • A fundamental obsession with Cases distorts our learning.
    • The Cobra Effect — when the British were in India, they decided there were too many cobras. So they announced an award for every cobra head turned in.  Then people set up cobra farms so they would have a supply of cobra heads.
    • The Butterfly Effect — a small thing can combine with other small things to create a big effect.
    • The Hawthorne Effect — if you do something new and pay attention to people, it will nearly always work the first time. However, you should not assume you can scale it. Until you really know WHY it worked, you should not replicate WHAT you did.
    • Cases are useful for explaining a situation. However, few cases have any predictive power. (Good science should have predictive power.)
      • if all you have is observations, you cannot scale
      • you need to be able to explain WHAT happened using reliable science
  • The Nature of the System Constrains how we can Act in It.
    • Start by understanding the nature of the current system
      • Ordered system — there are effective links in the system
        • checklists work
        • predictable, repeatable behavior
        • the whole = sum of the parts
      • Chaotic system — there are no effective links in the system — if you cannot contain the system, you have crisis; if you can contain the system, you have an opportunity for innovation.
      • Complex system — not a rigidly defined structure, it is ambiguous
        • variable links, permeable container
        • the whole is not the sum of the parts
        • use real-time feedback to moderate/modulate behaviors
    • The Law of Unintended Consequences — this is the only guaranteed feature of Complexity. If you know unintended consequences are inevitable, then you are ethically responsible for those consequences. Therefore, you should not make large, unmanageable interventions. Instead, make small safe-to-fail interventions in the present situation and then, once you have a body of evidence, announce the existence of these interventions.
      • This is in contrast to the usual corporate approach:  start by announcing a major initiative. In Snowden’s view, this inevitably dooms the initiative to failure.
      • The better approach is to set out on a journey rather than setting goals.
  • Distributed Ethnography.
    • Allow individuals to describe for themselves what is happening, rather than relying on experts. This empowers them and triggers novel solutions to tough problems.
    • Peer-to-peer knowledge flows are more effective than top-down mediated knowledge flows. Therefore, we need to engage people in the sensemaking.
  • New Theory of Change.
    • Discard the systems approach that starts by identifying a future perfect state and then tries to drag everyone into that future state. This appears in KM when we try to create the ideal future: a knowledge-sharing culture.
    • The better approach is to amplify what is working and diminish that which is not working. So, instead of striving for a distant goal, aim for the “adjacent possible.”
    • This translates into “nudging” the system into a better state rather than attempting to drag the system into that better state.
Share

Hacking the Old Way of Working #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: Hacking the Old Way of Working

During the past three years, the Port of Antwerp Authority designed a new process for generic knowledge work, supported with new kinds of tools. Our concept got awarded in Washington, which was a true confirmation, but it also started an important change project. The people factor (new skills, culture, communication) in change was underestimated. Hear about the dilemmas, disruption, tools, and trajectory and coping mechanisms.  It’s a process of thought and action combined in design, learning, experimentation and especially perseverance. Filled with tips and insights!

Speaker: Filip Callewaert, Head Information and Knowledge Management, Port of Antwerp Authority

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Don’t focus on the Eggs!.  We tend to focus too much on the eggs — the eggs are the results, the outputs of knowledge work. However, there is insufficient ROI on storing and organizing eggs that will inevitable rot over time. Instead, we should focus on the messiness and complexity of knowledge work itself.
  • How to focus on the knowledge process? Currently, much knowledge work is done in the dark, in solitary work or in Therefore, the answer is to enable observable work — by “Working Out Loud.” This serves to “lower the sea level,” thereby making more of the previously hidden iceberg of knowledge work more visible.
  • Keep testing your current ways of working — some of this works and some of it doesn’t:
    • Meetings — why do we have so many? How to have better meetings?
    • Project Management — why do so many projects fail?
    • Business Process Management — why are your process manuals covered with dust?
    • Personal Task Management — Me, Myself and My Silo
    • Team Task Management — how to introduce yet another tool for this?
    • Time Management — how to stop your head from hurting because of multitasking
  • How his organization improves knowledge work.
    • They work in the open (by default), where the content is available for immediate feedback.
      • Adaptive Case Management / Dynamic Case Management / Intelligent Case Management  — this is a process to “manage” knowledge work.
        • whenever they have a business challenge/ problem, they open a case
        • when problems get too big — open a case
        • their main ambition is to close the case
        • the case is “the single spot for action” for solving the problem — everyone involved in the problem does their work inside the case site in their social platform
        • they use templates to help structure their case site
    • They have 100% engagement/contribution. Because the case space is WHERE they work, there are no lurkers. This solves the 90-9-1 problem endemic with many social tools.
    • The case is a “container” but that container is open — people are invited in to help solve the problem.
  • New ways of working require new skills, attitudes, and behaviors.
    • content curation
    • community facilitation, platform building
    • conversation facilitation, moderation
    • “classical” information management
    • knowledge work management
    • critical thinking
    • meta-management (social learning)
    • information design
    • way-showing (wayfinding)
    • design thinking
    • working out loud
    • “Tweeting” (give the essence of information in 140 characters of less
    • empathizing
  • Book Recommendation: When Thinking Matters in the Workplace: How Executives and Leaders of Knowledge Work Teams can Innovate with Case Management by Keith Swenson.
  • How to Succeed in this work.
    • get acquainted with the “new stuff” and how it impacts your work
    • remain an “eternal learner”
Share

KM in Reality: Tools & Techniques #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description:  KM in Reality: Tools & Techniques

Our speakers look at using KM fundamentals, concepts, leadership, and processes to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of planning, problem- solving, decision making, collaboration, continuity, knowledge capture and sharing, innovation, and learning. From using knowledge repositories/ forums on SharePoint to maximize learning to the use of chat, online meetings, OneNote, etc., to enhance knowledge sharing, and after action reviews, they illustrate how to transform knowledge-intensive activities into knowledge processes with related goals and objectives supporting the organization’s mission and vision.

Speakers:

Shellie Glass, Chief Knowledge Officer, United States Southern Command
Peter Barcelo Jr., Knowledge Management Officer, United States Southern Command

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • The United States Southern Command (“SC”)
    • Website: http://www.southcom.mil/Pages/Default.aspx
    • Area of Responsibility:
      • Central (excluding Mexico) and South America, as well as the Caribbean.
      • They protect the southern approaches to the United State
      • They carry out humanitarian missions in their area of responsibility
      • They manage Guantanamo
      • Their commander’s mantra: “Fast, Flat and Agile.”
  • SC Knowledge Management Structure.
    • The KM Office reports to the SC Chief of Staff (a two-star Air Force general)
    • They have a KM Working Group — it involves each of the functional groups within SC.
  • KM Principles.
    • They use the 12 Army Knowledge Mangement Principles
      • built on a foundation of People and Culture
      • Then a layer of process
      • Then a layer of technology
      • Then multiple columns (like the Parthenon) — see first slide
      • All under the “roof” of a Culture of Collaboration
  • KM Hands-On Tools & Techniques.
    • Emphasized use of:
      • Chat — this proved to be very fast and effective during their Hurricane Matthew response. They used WhatsApp to good effect — it allowed them to connect with other government departments and NGOs working in Haiti.
      • SharePointCollaboration Site — SharePoint is the authorized vehicle for the DoD. It was the “landing area” for posting, finding, searching.
      • All partner access network (APAN) — see Hurricane Matthew Response site
      • Video teleconference (VTC)
      • Sharing, collaborating, transparency
      • continuous battle-rhythm
      • Senior Leader Engagement
    • Deemphasized (whenever possible) EMAIL = a single point of failure
      • they found that email traffic decreased significantly during the operation
  • Knowledge Processes.
    • Knowledge Management Institute Model
      • Acquire information/knowledge
      • Produce knowledge — collaborate, refine, create
      • Integrate knowledge — publishing, structuring, instructing, presenting
    • SECI Model
      • by Nonaka & Takeuchi
      • Socialization — collaboration / share knowledge
      • Eternalization — capture knowledge / write reports
      • Combination — build knowledge / transfer best practices
      • Internationalization — learning by doing
Share

Using Lenses to Right Fit Social & Collaboration #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: Using Lenses to Right Fit Social & Collaboration

Organizations have been deploying new digital work platforms and services the past few years. Quite often we hear that the tools don’t matter that much, just get one and use it. Adding a community manager and digital transformation specialists helps, but the tools don’t seem to do what is needed. The question is constantly, “Do the tools fit our needs?” and also “We see value but it seems like it isn’t quite right.” Well, not only is getting the right help important, it is important to right fit the tools to the needs and uses. The uses and needs can be complex and diverse. This session helps break down the diversity, enabling the dimensions and their elements to be viewed properly so what is relevant for your organization can be seen through the use of social lenses. Using the lenses as a diagnostic tool to understand what works and fits and where there are gaps and needs helps bring clarity. But, greater clarity is provided when pairing the lenses to view different perspectives clearly.

This is particularly helpful for improving use and knowledge flows through the organization’s understanding of the right fit of tool(s) and services. Using the lenses to see the relevant dimensions and how they intersect not only helps organizations understand the needs for today, but works as a valuable method for framing an adaptive road map for the coming years. Having clarity to see the smaller actual pieces enables sensing their changes in order to adjust and adapt with more clarity of understanding.

Speaker: Thomas Vander Wal, Sr. Consultant, Adjuvi, LLC

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Don’t Start with a Tool or Service First.  Most organizations end up with an enterprise-wide platform because it was bundled “free” with another tool. Often, the free tools and services do not quite fit the need. 
  • Start by Understanding Your Needs First.
    • Common, shared working spaces
    • Increasing knowledge sharing
  • Don’t Default to Closed Node System.
    • Top down
    • Approval-centric
    • Slow to spread
    • Slow to change
    • Knowledge is buried — it is hard to search, it is hard to find knowledge. Therefore, the focus is on training to help spread the knowledge
    • Email is the “poster child” of the closed node network
  • Open-Node Systems.
    • Emergent
    • Sharing-centric
    • Nimble and adaptive
    • Understand that things are constantly changing — this is both accepted and accommodated by the way we work
    • Knowledge is searchable and linked — even among disparate services or repositories. By having things in an open-node environment, the links among knowledge “light up the dark web inside your organization.”
    • Focus on helping rather than on training
    • Open digital conversation
    • Supports collaborative and collective living documents — they change to reflect current realities
    • All history and transitions are viewable and available
    • Conversations around objects occur with those objects in clear sight –e.g.,  connecting comments to the object that is being discussed
  • What’s the most valuable? While the final decision is good to know, it can be even more helpful to have access to the thinking that led to the decision. This allows a later pivot, without having to redo the entire decisionmaking process.
  • Social Progressions. This is how to develop and scale new ideas
    • Sparks — individual ideas that arise in disparate places and seem to be pointing to a useful pattern or direction.
    • Campfire — bring together the various disconnected items into a central place where a a group can discuss it “around the campfire”
    • Bonfire — add more fuel, bring in more people, widen the discussion in an open environment
    • Torch — safe, reliable, repeatable in different environments. This is what you have to create in order to share the ideas that emerged from the sparks to campfire to bonfire process.
    • Organizations with 1 social platform have a high probability of having two or more platforms.
  • Differing Perspectives.
    • Personal — in a social environment, people need to know what they are working on, information regarding who and what they need to know to get my job done are within easy reach.
    • Collective — getting into the open the information from individual understanding that now needs to be made available to others.
    • Cooperative — once the information is the open, allowing people to draw connections between those materials and themselves. (Example: seeing that someone else has an understanding of an issue that is similar to mine. We have a connection that might be worth exploring.) This operates at several scales:
      • Individual
      • Team
      • Group
      • Community
      • Network
    • Collaborative — this involves moving a disparate group of individuals into a single whole.
    • Social Working Array — you need to be able to see all of these perspectives as they occur across the platform and across the organization: Collective, Cooperative, Collaborative
  • Social Scaling.
    • Humans are mostly social by nature but often are not social at scale.  (See Reed’s Law.) People move up and down the scale. This needs to be accommodated by social platforms.
    • Most people are most comfortable interacting with a small group of others they know; their comfort decreases as group size grows.
    • Humans naturally build groups and clusters to ease interacting with large groups
  • Team Needs. The most frequently occuring group is the Team. They interact at the 70% level. (By contrast, Communities online tend to interact at the 30% level.) You need to understand the needs of a team as it operates:
    • tasks
    • status
    • process
    • progress
    • calendars
    • decisionmaking
  • Social Groups and Walled Gardens.
    • Closed groups (closed node) tend to have high adoption and activity rates as compared to open groups. This relates to a lack of comfort with sharing in a more open environment.
    • We need to create comfortable spaces with permeable walls. See Donald Appleyard’s “Livable Streets” for a similar approach in a physical (rather than digital) environment. Having front porches helped people in their houses feel more comfortable coming outside and hanging out on the street. Having front windows helped people on the street understand the people in the houses better.
  • How to Improve your online groups? Have a team that includes the following:
    • Community manager
    • Social interaction designer
    • Social scientists — they see strengths and gaps in the social interactions within the group
    • Knowledge manager
    • UX/User Research
    • Change Manager
    • IT Dev/ Integrator
  • Typical Problems.
    • Services go away — so plan redundancy/failovers
    • Change is constant — so plan to be nimble
    • Plan for continued security, privacy/permissions and changes in scaling as they occur
    • Plan for the many pieces that exist in your system — you need integration/interoperation, umbrella services, community managers/navigation

    • Selection & review — have a six-month tool review, understand the balance between change and stability and long-term assessments; keep your vendor assessments fresh
Share

Digital Workspace Predictions #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: Digital Workspace Predictions

2016 is a tipping point around mobile and cloud-based workplace technology. Our analyst shares twelve predictions including wearables gain traction, mobile-first finally arrives, content management is standard, a ‘chief digital workplace officer, SharePoint, and more.

Speaker: Jarrod Gingras, Senior Analyst and Managing Director, Real Story Group

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • A True Employee-Centric Digital Workplace is about to be a priority for most enterprises.  A TRUE digital workplace means more than just an intranet and a few add-ons.  Currently, only 12% of enterprises have a TRUE digital workplace that is truly employee-centric.
  • User-Centered Design Makes its Way into the Enterprise. Move beyond the technology stack; start with what the employees actually need and want.  Currently, most enterprises start by acquiring promising technology and
  • New Roles on the Digital Workplace team. You will now need new roles such as designer or UX designer on your team.
  • Enterprises will Continue to Struggle to See Beyond Features. Most enterprises start with a list of features (e.g., a blogging tool, a coauthoring tool, etc.). The better approach is to identify first what you are trying to achieve. Then look for the right tool that helps you achieve your intended outcome. Typical work goals:
    • knowledge management
    • external collaboration
    • internal collaboration
    • case management
    • communities
    • innovation support
    • social Q&A
    • expertise location
  • Enterprises will Continue to Struggle with the Gap Between Executive and Staff Desires.
  • Smart Enterprises will Start Managing Applications as Products. More enterprises will bring an application manager onboard to supervise the care and feeding of an application as if it were a product;
  • Emergence of Chief Digital Workplace Officer Role. More enterprises will be hiring into this position — sometimes called the Chief Employee Experience Officer. This person is responsible for the employee experience within the enterprise
  • Continued Product/Platform Divide.
    • Platforms: IBM, Microsoft SharePoint, Oracle
    • Major Suites: Drupal, Google, Jive, SAP Jam, Verint
    • Smaller Suites (Intranet in a box): Atlassian, Atos, Igloo, Interact, Thoughtfarmer, Traction Software
    • Social Enterprise Layers & SharePoint Supplements (services that bring the ability to collaborate to the place where you are working): Microsoft Yammer, neudesic, Salesforce Chatter, Sitrion, TIBC, vmware
  • Mobile Capability Becomes Critical. This is no longer an option; we have no choice. But there is a big deficit. Currently, these are the levels of mobile access:
    • 100% email
    • everything else is MUCH less available and effective on a mobile device
  • Major Shift to the Cloud. Increasingly, organizations are moving their social collaboration technology into the cloud. Currently, 45% are primarily on premises, only 27% are primarily Saas / Cloud-based
  • Slack will not Kill Email. Currently, Slack barely makes a dent in email. Its impact is much smaller than Yammer, Chatter, Jive
  • Facebook Repeats Google’s Mistakes. Facebook at work will not work for the enterprise — their technology fundamentally not built for the enterprise. Therefore, enterprise IT directors will lots of unpleasant surprises when they discover that the functionality they need is not there — especially permissioning.
Share

Design Thinking for the Digital Workplace #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: Design Thinking for the Digital Workplace

“Design” is a powerful word in modern business and a key element of a successful digital workplace (intranet). Design ensures that the right solutions are delivered and that they work in a simple and delightful way. “Design thinking” provides a toolbox of techniques for understanding needs, designing systems, and prototyping. This session explores these techniques and shows how they can be applied to the future of work.

Speaker: Rebecca Rodgers, Principal Consultant, Step Two

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Four streams of the digital workplace.  
    • Technology
    • Business
    • Design
    • People
  • Start with a deep understanding of the people you are serving. You can’t deliver effective solutions to people you haven’t actually met. You need to understand what they need, not just what they want.
  • How to research the people you are serving.
    • “retro” research methods don’t work
      • surveys
      • focus groups
    • modern field research does work:
      • one-on-one interviews: talking to them (at length)
        • ask them to tell you their stories – what is hard, what is easy, etc.
      • workplace observation: spending time with them as they work
      • co-designing with them
  • Emotions are critical. Explore the emotions that are behind the behaviors and actions of the people you seek to serve.
  • Be open. Channel your inner four-year-old — don’t start with judgment, start with inquiry.  Ask why, then ask why (many times) again.
  • Look for patterns. Expand your inquiry, look for confirming and conflicting data points from similarly situated people.
  • Capture what you learn. Document what they say, do, think and feel.
    • use quotations
    • use photographs
    • document their stories
  • Address the Fundamentals of Good User Experience.
    • Empathize — Start with needs
    • Define the problem
    • Card sorting — to understand how users group and label information
    • Create architecture using that card sorting, then test that architecture with more users. Can they navigate easily?
    • Ideate using all the rich research you have done — preferably put the results of that research on your walls — surround yourself with inspiration from your research.
    • Prototype – this is a manual process so get out from behind your computer, use your hands, use physical objects.
      • prototype with the user in mind
      • each prototype should answer a specific question
    • Test — repeatedly
Share

KM Opps, Realities & Challenges #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: KM Opps, Realities & Challenges

New opportunities, new realities, and some old challenges.

Forces transforming “knowledge” and “knowledge sharing” include globalization, the information tsunami, on-demand expectations, flexible talent models, and cognitive technologies. This is the new reality of business and the enterprise, but the strategic choices we make to deliver knowledge at the point of need are not so different and represent new opportunities to familiar challenges.  Jooste discusses cognitive  technology, how millennials are remaking organizations and may be KM’s best new hope, “reinventing failure,” stopping knowledge from walking out the door, brain science and future scenarios for KM – disruption, design thinking, indifference or

Forces transforming “knowledge” and “knowledge sharing” include globalization, the information tsunami, on-demand expectations, flexible talent models, and cognitive technologies. This is the new reality of business and the enterprise, but the strategic choices we make to deliver knowledge at the point of need are not so different and represent new opportunities to familiar challenges.  Jooste discusses cognitive  technology, how millennials are remaking organizations and may be KM’s best new hope, “reinventing failure,” stopping knowledge from walking out the door, brain science and future scenarios for KM – disruption, design thinking, indifference or appification?

Speakers: Adriaan Jooste, CKO, Deloitte Advisory

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • Experience.  “Experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want.”
  • Knowledge Management Waves and Tsunamis. KM has gone through waves — moving through one industry to another. However, now we face a tsunami in the workplace:
    • The sheer amount of information leads to cognitive overload. Cognitive overload leads us to narrowed focus, which hampers creativity.
    • Rob Cross reports that for the average worker, requests to collaborate have gone up by 80%. (This is taken from a recent Rob Cross podcast.)
    • Email is growing worse; it is not going away
    • We suffer from inefficient processes.
  • KM Disruption. How have we handled disruption? How are we handling current and potential disruptive forces?
    • moving from storytelling to books
    • moving from books to computers
    • moving from computers to websites
    • incorporating AI
    • distributing content managers around the world
    • sharing knowledge globally across international organizations
    • search — no one in the room believes that their enterprise search is within 30% as good as Google
    • mobile and tablets — only a handful of people in the room believe that their organizations have good mobile apps
    • analytics and Big Data —  no one in the room has incorporated analytics or big data in their KM efforts
    • blockchain — one or two attendees in the room are investigating this but no one in the room is using blockchain for KM.
    • flexible talent models — working with colleagues who are not always employees
    • virtual reality or augmented reality — why can’t your KM system be like Pokemon Go?
    • cognitive computing
  • Most promising Cognitive Technologies. Deloitte is working on several innovative programs using the new technologies listed below. In fact, Deloitte has won awards for using these innovative tools in one of the most conservative aspects of their business: audit. For more information on this, see the Deloitte MOOC on cognitive technologies.
    • Natural language processing
    • Computer vision
    • Machine Learning
    • Text Mining
    • Robotics
    • Speech Recognition
    • Sensing and Shaping
  • The impact of Cognitive Computing on KM. Cognitive computing will disrupt business and we will see its impact on knowledge management. Don’t be misled into believing that this is an “edge” technology. It is here and it is being used to powerful effect by market leaders.
  • Globalization. Deloitte’s clients want access to standardized services globally but they still value local creativity and responsiveness to their local context.
  • Millennials are our best hope for KM.
    • Their natural bent is toward sharing
    • They want work-life balance
    • They tend not to stay in one place long. So Deloitte focuses increases speed to competency. And then, when they move on, Deloitte has a program that treats them as “colleagues for life.”
      • Deloitte has built “Deloitte University” to train their employees — particularly their millennials.
    • They like rewards and recognition — they particularly want recognition for work well done.
    • They care about doing well by doing good.
    • They like having the latest technology.
  • KM Success depends on Behavior Change. KM has many of the same characteristics as lifestyle choices (e.g., exercising, sleeping, eating properly, etc.). You need to make the change, and hten make a commitment to sustain that change and to work continually on improving your outcomes. Success requires information, support, and feedback. Therefore, use what we know about brain science to improve the rate of behavior change.  For example, if you receive positive feedback when someone uses content you have contributed, then your brain gets a little opioid hit. This encourages you to contribute more.
  • KM and Innovation. KM should support innovation. But it isn’t just about enabling innovation more, it is really about increasing the rate of adoption of innovation.
  • KM Lessons learned at Deloitte.
    • Governance is fundamental to good KM.
    • Your KM program must be tailored to your organization’s context.
    • Invest in a formal knowledge management approach
    • Continually make the business case — daily
    • KM is an evolutionary process
    • Point solutions are a double-edged sword
    • Technology is not a panacea for KM ills
  • Moving your organization from a negative to a positive view of KM.
    • KM is “the thing that must not be named.” — if you have any KM, it is hidden within a quality or other program (e.g., six sigma, project management, etc.)
    • Active resistance — These people do not think KM is useful. These active resisters can be extremely effective missionaries once they are won over. So focus on them. And, in the process, you will learn the most and sharpen your game.
    • Passive resistance
    • Indifference
    • Benevolent neglect
    • Active support
    • Essential to organizational success and survival — this the optimum
  • Optimistic Future of KM.
    • no email
    • no website — just use apps
    • designing thinking builds knowledge into every step of every process your people do
  • The Three Pilot Rule
    • do one easy pilot so you have a quick win
    • do a tough pilot so you learn
    • do a pilot that will make senior leadership pay attention and then sign the checks you need
Share

Search Outside the Box #KMWorld

KMWlogo_Stacked_Session Title and Description: Thinking and Searching Out of the Box

Our industry helps people retrieve information by searching, browsing, and visualizing the data stored within their content management systems. This endeavor is inherently introspective in so far as it focuses on the close analysis of an enterprise’s internal content. This talk is an exercise in thinking outside of that box. Clarke explores ways in which an enterprise’s internal content can be mined for information, even when the answers don’t always exist within the data we are querying. He discusses the use of natural language processing and semantic query expansion techniques, demonstrating the power of ontologies and machine reasoning to interrogate internal content in new and powerful ways.

Speakers:

Dave Clarke, CEO, Synaptica
Maish Nichani, Co-founder, Ola Search

[These are my notes from the KMWorld 2016 Conference. I’m publishing them as soon as possible after the end of a session, so they may contain the occasional typographical or grammatical error. Please excuse those. To the extent I’ve made any editorial comments, I’ve shown those in brackets.]

NOTES:

  • What is the “Box”?  The box is your content collection.
  • What’s the difference between search inside and outside the “Box”? The speakers assert that you can do better job searching your internal content if you first map your content to external content.  For example, if you type in a general query or a minimalist query, the search engine needs to understand the concepts implicit in the query. If the search engine does not have the required information, the search engine will (at best) return a rather general response that may not contain the desired results. By contrast, if you map externally after the search, you can see how a similar search is handled externally. That exercise will help enrich the query, thereby giving the search engine more useful information to work with.
  • Do not think small about Search. Search is not just about locating specific content. It is also (and increasingly) about finding answers to specific questions. Google is learning that users increasingly want answers to questions (e.g., how to treat the common cold) rather than particular documents or videos.
  • Start by mapping. When you map internal content to the external content, this helps you understand better what is inside your content collection. It finds and validates information that is not already in your content collection, but that can be used to enrich both the initial user search and the results the search engine brings back.
  • How does this fit with your taxonomy?  Taxonomy and search belong together. Make sure your search engine does not ignore the taxonomy that you have built so carefully. Equally, sometimes your taxonomy does not encompass everything you need for an efficient search. So searching “outside the box” can help enrich the taxonomy and search.
Share