Adoption idea : meetings are KM 2.0 behaviours
What I found in my last conference call is that most of what we talked about in the call can also be done online, in our community page, when we are not present at the same time (asynchronous).
These are three types of things we did in the conference call, that cover blogs, forums, and wikis:
Harold Jarche Â» Time Out
What I find really interesting is that we finally have technology that makes it possible for us to do most work anytime, anywhere, yet we continue to stick with our same old paradigms of working in a particular location during certain hours. We also stick by our belief that time is the best measure of what we do, rather than results.
Personally Managing Your Knowledge
These are to Connect, Exchange and Contribute. These internal and external activities are a way of moving from implicit to explicit knowledge by observing, reflecting and then putting tentative thoughts out to our â€œcommunityâ€.
informal coalitions: The â€œkeep it simpleâ€ mantra and the complex dynamics of organizations
So, reducing the clutter of unnecessary or overly complicated structures, systems and procedures would certainly make organizations simpler. But the socially complex nature of the underlying dynamics of those organizations would remain
Want to be like Google? Pay More Than Lip Service to Employee Contribution
What about Googleâ€™s management style is so powerful, yet still transferable to other organizations?
What Enterprise 2.0 technologies make possible, Management 2.0 should embrace.
Look at areas of your operation where embracing employee input is critical to a successful outcome
Break the ice by putting management on the same footing as employees
Give employees a voice
Lost in Matrix Management – Gill Corkindale
One theme has emerged loud and clear from executives I have been coaching this year: the utter frustration of operating in complex and shifting matrix management systems. The complaints are legion: multiple and complex reporting lines, confusion over accountability, competing geographical and functional targets, lack of role clarity, too many people involved in decisions, lack of support from senior managers, and the politics and conflicts arising from continual organisational restructuring.
Matrix structures broke down the hierarchies, allowing teams to share information across task boundaries and enabling managers and staff to build their knowledge and experience across projects.
employees became confused over conflicting loyalties, with line managers retaining central control and dotted line managers imposing extra demands.
Managers soon realised that they hindered rather than helped them work effectively
On top of this, organisations have been slow to realise the need for training in the skills necessary to navigate matrices: communication, influencing, coaching, negotiation and conflict management. The result is an almost impossible situation in which to lead or manage.