Creating a corporate memory is about telling stories

I really believe conversations are key to capturing tacit knowledge, best practices,  all those things that are parts of the individual’s patrimony and can only be captured an harnessed by stimulating individual memories through conversations, since they are the most accessible form of knowledge.

Hence the necessity to provide the organization with tools that make those open discussions and their stimulation possible, just as their capitalization.

Most often, when I talk about conversations it’s about best practices, knowledge transfer, everything that can suport the business function and I think there’s nothing more to say on this point, but this note from Scott Monty made me think of another dimension that would really fit with the idea of “corporate memories”, going beyond pure business to adress corporate culture purposes. [Read more...]

Capturing knowledge is a permanent activity

Capturing knowlegde was often a failure since it was considered as a task by itself and not an “on the flow” activity.

People were asked to take tame to give information, which didn’t work the reasons everybody knwos. What counts is organizing a real time information capture, that’s to say integrated in people’s day to day job in order to make it painless.

The first track that has to be explored is to shift existing flows to tools that make capitalisation, sharing and reuse possible. No additional workload for individual but a gain at the organization scale, as I already said here.

At a first glance, it’s seems to fit perfectly for exchanges about day to day best pratices.

.

People are more likely to share information if they know why

Companies know their performance depends more and more on their ability to use information. But information that’s not harnessed can’t be used.

There are two kinds of information : company generated information that’s harnessed (even if people within the organization don’t know where to find it), and employee generated information that remains informal and is only known from its owner and some few people around him, because it’s not harnessed at the organization scale.

Harnessing this informal information is one of enterprises 2.0′s purposes. As said in this Gartner’s post, this kind of information exists and is available as flows, contrary to what people used to know, that is more about stocks. That’s quite destabilizing because the liquidity of this information, the fact it’s owned by employees, and the fact that employees share it and make it available for the whole organization only if they want is the exact opposite of everything that’s been known till then. [Read more...]

Sharing knowledge is not a task but a way of working

I just saw this interesting post on this topic,  thanks to Martin Roulleaux-Dugage. The difference between traditional KM and its “2.0″ evolution is that it’s not a task anymore but a way of doing things, a on-the-flow activity.

Take time to classify, fill in forms, stock is real burden that often lead KM projects to fail. In the other hand, in just a few clics, classify, share an information as soon as it’s identified, write a quick note about it, quickly identify related documents and people who would be able to help me with my daily problemactics is rather a way of working. It’s not a task that need me to book some time, it’s an ever ongoing on the flow activity which is not its own purpose anymore but is linked to my daily problems solving.

This reminds me of my usual answer when I’m asked how much time it will take to a group to share knowledge within its members, how much time it will take to stimulate the group. The waited answer is often about hours, half days… My answer is the following : it won’t take a lot a time but it will take often a little time. But if there’s a business need behind, it will be painless. Minutes here, seconds there, on the flow, not hours spend when doing otherwise is impossible, when it’s impossible to wriggle and when job is botched up done reluctantly.

Best practices are not the best : it’s those that work

Now that transfert of best pratices is at the center of companies’ concernes, old habits seem to be a real barrier.

How are things done ?

The best solution brought to a problem within the company (and sometimes at competitor’s) is identitied and implemented. Easy, isn’t it ?

But there’s a snag. Since activities are not as repeatable as they were, similar consequences may have totally different causes. Global solutions reach their limits and it’s obvious than a contextualizes issue needs a contextualized answer. Because of different social context, of different cultures, of differences in the relationship with one client, the same solution won’t apply in Paris, New York or Beijing.

Problem : if it’s impossible to find a one and only solution, how to implement a different solution for each issue ? At this time we realize that a best pratice is the best only when we consider the context.

The solution is to make a wide range of solutions available and chose the one which is the best in a specific situation. Better, to focus not only on the answer but on the way people thought to built it. And allow exchanges that will make the transfer possible, taking the context into account, which is the specific characteristic of peer to peer learning. That means identifying not only solutions but also the people who put it at work.

The end of “one size fits all” solutions may turn the often failing mechanism of best practices transfert into a social learning mechanism. And implementation into discussions.

Connecting formal and informal knowlegde to create business value.

If enterprise 2.0 is to develop informal networks and tacit knowledge formalization within the enterprise, there’s still one question to be answered : how does all the spent energy contributes to create business value ?

Actually, I consider it as a keypoint in every project I manage : the use of all this intangible patrimony for formal business needs has to be organized. Because value creation will always be something structured.

Saying that, I don’t think that the “spent energy” words are quite relevant. I think “recycled energy” would be better. In fact, social networks already exist but are not used except in a very small perimeter, tacit knowledge exists too but only at an individual scale, but there are not valuable at the organization scale.

Let go back to our purpose : using informal and tacit assets in a formal business context, whitout which everything that has to do with enterprise 2.0 is useless.

[Read more...]

Archivists : a new performance lever

Everything started with this note about Lille Business school and some talks with an archivist, a job I didn’t know at all, or, as a lot of people, a job I thought I knew things about. It gave me the idea to make a little poll around me about how this function was considered within their companies.

I think the result won’t be a surprise for anybody. I’ve been talked about “temple keepers”, the people who know “were information is”. With a strong “achive” connotation. It’s like people were talking about old relicts for those who want to learn about the past but without any use in the day to day job, noboday talking about topicality, intelligence, digital information (as if archivists only knew paper).

Nothing to do with the talks I had with the above mentioned person. Nothing to do with what is made in Lille. A the time when information is  becoming more and more strategic, when it’s the basis on collaboration between people, when 75% of the companies’ value is made of intangible assets, it’s somehow a worrying situation.

What do companies need ? Funneling and organizing information that’s pouring into an always increasing numbers of channels. Of course, there’s still “paper information” that’s about both topicality and content. But there are also feeds coming from business/competitive monitoring on the web, since more and more companies try to take the most of each employee as a point of contact with their ecosystem. Of course the number of sources can be reduced but it’s more about closing our eyes to reality than trying to face it. [Read more...]

The art of managing information

Just the once won’t hurt, I’d like to share with you an interview given by Tom Davenport to the french economic newspaper “Les Echos”.

Here’s what he recommends

  • stop thinking about plumbing (technology) and focus on water (information)
  • wonder why, although information management relies up to 5% on technology and 95% on pyschology (Tom Peters), companies dedicate less 1% of their budgets to human issues.
  • start by mapping information’s presence within the company (without waiting for Information Management Systems to be deployed)
  • break informatician’s leadership on information management
  • help archivists to master new information management jobs
  • follow the example of television and press in information sharing

I wouldn’t have say it better.

Something to add ?

The best search engine is you

Access to qualified information is a double challenge : first because information is the new economic oil, second because we’re snowed under information.

Google showed the way : information relevance comes from users. The more you quote, the more you link, the more you read the more you give pertinance. Solutions that aim at analyzing user’s behaviors to prune the informational forest now arouse and added interest.

Saying that we admit the best search engine is nothing else that the individual, the most efficient engines trying to capitalize on human users behaviors. I wrote about it a year ago : the future is information social processing.

I experienced it yesterday afternoon : despite my employer provides us with a very efficent search engine, my first reflex was to ask a colleague “Do you know if we have something about that….where is it ?”. Immediate answer, more pertinent and quicker that the list the engine would have found.

So the best way to find the right information is to find the person who know it or know where it is. I talked about it yester with Alexis Mons who had this kind of discussion with an organization working in a very specifi context (can’t say more…). When teraoctet is the minimal information unit, the organization realized that the simplest query brought thousand pages of results and concluded that only the individual was able to make a really qualified search and that information qualification was, finally, highly related to its publisher.

The Aspen Insititute report concluded that the most accessible form of knowledge is conversation. So we just have to make the informal discussions become effective and capitalize on it.

Anne-Marie ducroux, president of the French Sustainable Development Council published a very interesting reflection about that. “Benchmarking experiencences often allows to enrich people and even innovation“she said. She continued “convergence between everyone’s actions has to be reinforced, new relationships between players have to be built, outdates distinctions have to be abolished and new collaborations have to be encouraged. This begins inevitably by discussions. Hence the need of building their crucible : tools, moments, places and mediations“. She finally concluded : “New alchimists, in the 21th century, won’t try to make gold but conversations…that are worth gold for society“.

Nothing more than the way our organizations have to follow in the upcomming years.

Why making people discuss about informal business issues is valuable

People have to exchange and discuss within the enterprise. Yes…but why? They just have to stick on basic relationships, they’re here for business and nothing more…

Yes but… as said in a Forrester report,  Informal learning connects with Corporate Training Programs, when, in 1986 75%  of the knowledge people needed to do their day-to-day job were in their head, this percentage dropped to 10% in 2006. People have not become stupid but the increasing need for specialization and granularity of expertises implies there’s too much to know for an individual. And if you consider the need for an ever improved reactivity???

What Forrester suggests :

THE DAYS OF FILLING EMPTY HEADS IS OVER!

The new critical skill is the ability to un-learn and rapidly learn new. Here’s a few suggestions I have for you to survive in this new world.

1. Enhance Your Network/Community
If only 10% of insight is useful, then the more connected you are the better the chances you will get the help you need with your network. Personally I prefer the concept of community over a network. Your network/community needs to have a trusting relationship to work. Notice I didn’t say build the network. The fact that you have 1000 contacts on LinkedIn is useless unless you are able to really tap into each of those 1000 contacts. Don’t just focus on quantity, focus on strength of your relationships.

2. Constantly Learn
Take advantage of RSS & Social Bookmarking! There is so much information out there, how do you find what is of value to you. RSS & Social Bookmarking holds part of the answer.

3. Collaborate
More and more we have opportunities to collaborate. Take advantage of them. If you want to be the lone hero all of the time… You will end up just being alone.

4. Develop Critical Thinking Skills
With the abundance of information, and no clear cut answer on anything. You’ll need to personally evaluate what is right and what is even more correct. Tap into the network, RSS, other sources but in the end make-up your own decision.

Hum… since I’m working onblog about productivity in the knowledge economy I think this may help…