Fahey & Prusak (1998) argue that one of the deadliest sins of knowledge management is “substituting technological contact for human interface.” Unfortunately, many knowledge management programs rely too heavily on technology to the unfortunate minimalization or exclusion of the human side. However, to do this is to spell failure for “…although IT is a wonderful facilitator of data and information transmission and distribution…Knowledge is primarily a function and consequence of the meeting and interaction of minds” (Fahey & Prusak, 1998, p. 273). McDermott echoes this argument further stating that, “Knowing is a human act, whereas information is an object that can be filed, stored, and moved” (1999, p. 110). An important distinction is made here in both articles—that of information and data being objects that can be gathered, sorted, stored, and retrieved versus knowledge which is generated through human interaction via discussing and testing out new ideas and concepts. IT systems can do an outstanding job with information and data; however, true knowledge management is more than just information and data—it also involves elements of culture, change, community, motivation, and trust. Thus to ensure a successful knowledge management program, one must give equal or greater attention to the human component as to the technology component (Davenport & Prusak, 1998/2000).
So what is one to do to mitigate or counteract the effects of potentially relying too heavily on the technological side? First, ensure that equal or greater attention is paid to the human components of any knowledge management initiative. Be sure to consider and provide support for the human elements of culture, change, community, motivation, and trust—for without any one of these it can be difficult if not impossible to create an organization able of generating and sharing knowledge. Then, ensure that technology is considered only in context of how it can support the generation and sharing of knowledge. Do not allow the technology to lead the solution, but rather to let the desired solution lead the technology.
Two specific examples of methods an organization can use to encourage and provide structure to the very important human side of knowledge management are community/corporate yellow pages or expertise location systems and communities of practice. Corporate yellow pages or expertise location systems are quick and relatively easy to implement and can provide a first step in connecting people to the experts and knowledge they seek. Communities of practice, or CoPs, are often cross-functional teams of professionals organized around a common goal such as a problem, practice area, or process (Nickols, 2003); as such, they can be outstanding vehicles for both the creation and sharing of knowledge. In these two examples, it is important to note that technology still plays a role, but that role is a supporting one. Corporate yellow pages may use such tools as Tacit’s ActiveNet or AskMe Enterprise. CoPs can also be aided by technology (especially when it is a virtual CoP); for example, technology may provide a means for virtual meetings via web conferencing, communication via email, document sharing via a web or FTP site, or even collaboration via a Wiki or content management system.
One additional and very important method is to have corporate policy that supports the knowledge creation and sharing process. Unfortunately, too many corporate cultures do not give people the most valuable resource needed to create and share knowledge—that is, time. However, if corporate policy (and upper management) clearly state and support these processes, then greater success can be had. For example, 3M has a program called the “Fifteen-Percent Rule” that supports employees spending up to 15% of their time in individual learning and knowledge-building pursuits that benefit not only them as individuals but also the organization in innovation and new product development—and a healthy bottom line (McElroy, 2003).
References
Davenport, T. & Prusak, L. (2000). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know (Paperback ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press. (Original work published 1998)
Distance Consulting. (2003). Communities of practice: A start-up kit [Brochure]. Fred Nickols.
Fahey, L. & Prusak, L. (1998). The eleven deadliest sins of knowledge management. California Management Review, 40(3), 265-276.
McDermott, R. (1999). Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4), 103-117.
McElroy, M. (2003). The new knowledge management: complexity, learning, and sustainable innovation. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
- Robin
Copyright Robin Donnan 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Performance Associates, Inc.
