Management & Technology

KM2.0 – Myth or Legend?0 yt o ege d

M tth H dMatthew HodgsonACT Regional-lead, Web and Information ManagementSMS Management & TechnologySMS Management & Technology

October 2008, ACTKM08

Podcasts and SlidesharePodcasts and Slideshare

www.slideshare.net/magia3e

A little audience participation . . . 

Fact or myth?Fact or myth?

Logical or mythological?Logical or mythological?

Objective or subjective?Objective or subjective?

A short history of mythA short history of myth

As we evolved …As we evolved …

Blaming AristotleBlaming Aristotle

Knowledge = Definition

Blaming AristotleBlaming Aristotle

Is: Is not:Is:• Round

Is not:• Square

• Cake• Sweet

• Beer• Salty• Sweet • Salty

Repositories for expertly defined knowledgeRepositories for expertly defined knowledge

Modern repositoriesModern repositories

After years of harboring his secret desiresNed finally hits on the senior librarian

More recently …More recently …

and in our own organisations… and in our own organisations

People

Document managementRewards

p

Keyword AAAg

TacitExplicit

Workflow Hoarding

Workflow ApprovalsWorkflow

R t i l

Hoarding

Expert reviewClassification

…the knowledge world we live inRetrieval Classification

gContent management

DataKnowledge capture Guard

B siness classification schemeDIRKSMetadata

a aKnowledge-base

Storytelling

Database Business classification schemeInformation managementProcesses Performance

Database

The world of knowledge is changingThe world of knowledge is changing

Web2.0: the new worldWeb2.0: the new world

Embraces :Embraces :• Subjective opinion – even Homer Simpson’s view of the world

Personal stories• Personal stories• Thinking ‘out-loud’, not refined, edited, controlled communication• Interaction and trust between people (not documents or repositories)• Identity, membership and community buildingy p y g• Instant gratification, low-barrier adoption & light-weight processes

Empowers:I di id l t ith t i t f f ‘ ll d’ • Individuals – me as an expert without interference from ‘so-called’ experts or gatekeepersC• Communities – it’s easy to be involved at any level

Knowledge as a product?Knowledge as a product? 

Constantly busyConstantly busy

Get busy! Work in isolation Expert classificationand

St

Expert reviewProduce

something

Store

Web 2.0 knowledge processesWeb 2.0 knowledge processesRefine

‘Burst’ ofthinking Tag and share Communicate/

CollaborateCollaborate

Web 2.0 knowledge rolesWeb 2.0 knowledge roles33%

19%13%

19%13%

19%15%

52%Source: Forrester Research, 2008

Web 2.0 behaviourWeb 2.0 behaviour

CreatorCreator:• Create, work “in the cloud”, comment, messagingCritic:• Comment trackback messagingComment, trackback, messagingCollector:

Cl if d t• Classify and tagJoiner:• Message, create personal profiles Spectator:Spectator:• Message, email, passive consumption of material

Web 2.0 knowledge toolsWeb 2.0 knowledge tools

Creator making new knowledge:Creator – making new knowledge:• Blog, Wikis, comment fields, instant messaging (eg. Twitter).

Critic – refining existing knowledge:• Blog comment fields TwitterBlog, comment fields, Twitter.

Collector – sharing and classification:• Delicious, Magnolia, Tagging.

Joiner – contributing to the social cohesion:Joiner contributing to the social cohesion:• Twitter, personal profiles, friends’ profiles, community

profilesprofiles.

Spectator – just watching from the sidelines:• Twitter, email,

Why do they do this?Why do they do this?

Creativity, problem solving, spontaneity

S lf t fid hi t t f th b thSelf-esteem, confidence, achievement, respect of other by others

Family, friendship, community, intimacy

Shelter, security

Food, water, air, sleep

Source: Wikipedia (Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, 1943)

It’s also about choiceIt s also about choice

Source: M Hodgson, 2007

It’s a model that works!It s a model that works!

Some stats:Some stats:• 6.5 billion people on the planet

O 1 billi l th I t t [1]• Over 1 billion people use the Internet [1]

• 0.5 billion use websites that facilitate social interaction, networking, and knowledge sharing [2]

• Blogs – 77.7 million unique visitors in the USA alone [3]Blogs 77.7 million unique visitors in the USA alone • Facebook – 41.0 million

M S 75 1 illi • MySpace – 75.1 million • Wikipedia – 100 million hours of evolving knowledge,

2 5 illi i E li h ti l 167 illi i i 5 5 illi 2.5 million in English articles, 167 million revisions, 5.5 million registered ‘authors’

How can we leverage this for KM?How can we leverage this for KM?

It doesn’t just happen – you need good strategyIt doesn t just happen – you need good strategy

P lPeople:• Understand people – how they think and behave

K b t i ti l lt it li it ti • Know about organisational culture – esp. its limitations

Objectives:• What behaviour do we want to reinforce and why• What do we want to achieve – the ROI to aim for

Technology:• Supporting behaviour with appropriate toolspp g pp p• Know any technology constraints

Source: Based on Forrester’s POST model , 2007

Social computing building blocksSocial computing building blocks

Source: G Smith, 2007

Case study: KM & social computing toolsCase study: KM & social computing tools

The problemThe problem

Standard solutionStandard solution

Team’s available brain spaceTeam s available brain space

Conceptual solutionConceptual solution

Delicious – sharingDelicious  sharing

HASTERM PARENT TERM OFTERM PARENT TERM OF

EQUIVALENT TO WikiEQUIVALENT TO WikiHAS

TERMHAS

TERM

PARENT TERM OF

Twitter – conversations & communityTwitter  conversations & community

Delicious – sharing bookmarksDelicious  sharing bookmarks

Blogs – sharing, conversations, and community

Benefits of using social computing toolsBenefits of using social computing tools

Managing the team’s knowledge:Managing the team s knowledge:• People – enabled Web 2.0 role diversity (creators, collectors, etc)• Objectives share ‘what we knew’ as we knew it as it evolved• Objectives – share what we knew , as we knew it, as it evolved• Technology – store context, who (selves!) knew what about which

terms enabled networking within and without the projectterms, enabled networking within and without the project

For the project:• Quick to set-up and easy to use p y• Accessible – web front-end so available off-site• Saved time – central location de-centralised controlSaved time central location, de centralised control• Repository for single source publishing – terms into multiple

physical documents for multiple usesphysical documents for multiple uses

ResultsResults

The good:The good:• Supported team’s work behaviour, not prescribed it

Vi ibilit f k l d ti• Visibility of new knowledge practices• Affected other people’s behaviour - other project teams j

from other divisions took notice, joined in, and used these tools

The bad:The bad:• We had broken traditional editorial approval process• The wiki was closed down …. why?

Culture affects the way we workCulture affects the way we work

There are national and There are national and regional cultural groupings that affect the behaviour of societies behaviour of societies and organisations, and that are very persistent that are very persistent across time.

Cultural DimensionsCultural Dimensions

High Power-Distance organisations:High Power Distance organisations:• Value power according to rank

V l hi h fl t i ti l t t• Value hierarchy over flat organisational structures• Love chain-of-command• Demand respect and formal deference for higher status

people people • Lots of formal processes and policies

Low Power-Distance organisations:• Flat structures• Informal processes and policies• Informal processes and policies

Power‐DistancePower Distance

Small organisationsTeam-based work

Many government organisations

Source: Hodgson, M (2008) The Relationship Economy

High Power‐Distance can kill!High Power Distance can kill!

Reinforces:Reinforces:• Empowers gatekeeper mentality• Position power• Control• Control• Knowledge as a linear, edited, and defined product

Almost impossible to:Almost impossible to:• Change – it’s the organisation’s personality we’re talking about• Introduce low-hierarchical activities encompassed by

‘social computing’social computing

How to get around Power‐DistanceHow to get around Power Distance

Wh l i d d li i t t When planning and delivering strategy …

Deploy it:At t l l j t l l• At a team-level or project level

Plan:• Security measures to keep it inside the team

L fil d l i• Leverage profiles and loginsCommunicate:Communicate:• From the bottom-up• Sell victories & story-tell lessons learned (blog about it?)

ConclusionsConclusionsKM might be about:• Storytelling • Environments to support knowledge transferEnvironments to support knowledge transfer

The reality – it’s Aristotle’s world of knowledge:The reality – it s Aristotle s world of knowledge:• 2000 years of expert knowledge as process

Objecti e fact al scientific and ph sical• Objective, factual, scientific and physical• Expertly defined • Expertly crafted and classified• Reinforces position-powerp p• High Power-Distance• Coming to an endComing to an end

ConclusionsConclusionsWeb 2.0 enables and values:• Subjective – individuals, thoughts, expression, ideas• Personal opinion – whether fact or mythPersonal opinion whether fact or myth• Self and community rather than ‘experts’• Different knowledge worker roles – collectors creators • Different knowledge worker roles – collectors, creators,

critics, joiners, spectators• Simple light-weight tools knowledge workers can use at • Simple, light-weight tools knowledge workers can use at

home

Web 2.0 is legendary stuff:S i l l ti li• Social revolution online

• Heralds a paradigm shift in Western thinking

FinFinWelcome to KM 2.0

KM2 0KM2.0

Myth or Legend?Myth or Legend?

Matthew HodgsonACT Regional-lead, Web and Information Management

SMS Management & Technology

Blog: magia3e.wordpress.comTwitter: magia3eTwitter: magia3e

Slideshare: www.slideshare.net/magia3e

Email: mhodgson@smsmt.comg @Mobile: 0404 006695