Bookmark me NavigationRecent blog posts |
Is Knowledge Management Just a Euphemism for Management?I’ve been posing a few awkward questions on the actKM list of late – questions which refuse to be placated and are at the heart of the black art of knowledge management. Elsewhere I have said I am uncomfortable with the term knowledge management, because no-one can actually define in a consistent way what it means. The problem is so bad that every book, academic paper, or popular magazine on the subject feels the need to define the term. Worse still once defined few authors actually stick to their definition! My exchanges on the actKM list have challenged people to define what they mean by “pure KM” and what makes something “pure KM”. Other questions have challenged the comment “there seems to be less of a KM focus” by asking the author to define what they mean by KM. Now in both cases the authors appear to be privileging the people component and soft methods like narrative over the technology and process components. In fairness they acknowledge the need for the other elements, but my point is they privilege the people component and define knowledge management, albeit implicitly, around the people dimension. This is a trend I am observing in a number of quarters. If knowledge management is moving to exclusively privilege the people component then what distinguishes the discipline from human resource management or even management in general? At the moment I can’t help but feel knowledge management is akin to alchemy! The Holy Grail seems to be to make absolutely everyone happy in the workplace! Managers, unless of course they are knowledge managers, are a sinister bunch with hidden agendas that can only be revealed by playing games, telling stories, and ascribing an archetype to them. These managers are self interested and only interested in profit maximization. Why do we begin with this premise? My experience suggests managers are almost exclusively well intentioned. I can’t think of one manager who starts the day with the intent to make someone’s day difficult! I know a few black leaders , but even they are the exception rather than the norm. I accept that people are important and that they matter. But I believe management goes well beyond managing the people element. For me knowledge management is about balancing people, processes, technology, and content resources to meet organisational objectives. It differs little, if at all, from the overarching discipline of management. Increasingly I think knowledge management is just a euphemism for management, where the real objective is about improving productivity for the collective good – convince me otherwise! Regards Graham
categories:
|
Concepts that have proven useful in ordering things easily achieve such authority over us that we forget their earthly origins and accept them as unalterable givens. |
Re: Is Knowledge Management Just a Euphemism for Management?
Hi Graham,
First, thanks for linking to crossderry. I like what I've seen here so far, I'll add you to the blogroll shortly.
I'm sympathetic to this view: KM is kept in its own little box by both management and KM specialists. KM folks tend to focus on one school to the exclusion of others; their definitions of KM are cramped as a consequence (see linked paper at http://crossderry.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/effective-knowledge-management-intro/).
As a consequence, most managers don't see how KM can effectively support management innovation OR they don't see their current KM team as capable of driving that innovation (http://crossderry.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/km-to-surface-management-innovation-opportunities/).
Again, good stuff and thanks,
Paul
Re: Is Knowledge Management Just a Euphemism for Management?
Hi Paul,
I've linked to Crossderry because I think it has high quality content. The paper you linked to is a good case in point. My first scan tells me I shoud go back and study it - based on my Study, Read, Skim, Bin heuristic. In coming days I might blog about a couple of the ideas you present. Some of these seem very close to ideas my business partner Patrick Byrne is developing.
I agree the points you made in the post. The very act of compartmentalising and specialising immediately constrains options. My worry is the increasing move to "people methods" at the expense of the other components. In my view this heralds the demise of knowledge management.
Regards, Graham
Re: Is Knowledge Management Just a Euphemism for Management?
Hi Graham, Until recently I also held many of the same views but recently I have started to shift, making some minor amendments.
Management is about defining an organisations goals, its purpose, its structure, its values. Knowledge Management allows us to; be more effective, more effeicient, improve quality and/or sustainability in order to better acheive those goals.
an additional note just for thought:
Much of KM seams to be about reflecting what it is that the humans have always done. Historicaly we shared stories, we networked, we knew who was who, and what they could do. With the rate of change and the global environment that we live in we need to understand ways of dynamic mapping for sharing and remebering, so that we will all know what it is that we need to know.
Re: Is Knowledge Management Just a Euphemism for Management?
Gina once again thank you for a considered response. I think there is much sloppy thinking and poor use of terms, to the point where knowledge management as a term is content free! That said I think you are on the path to capturing the objective or intent of knowledge management. I note your "definition" is inclusive by ommission - you don't specify people, process, technology or content as components. In my experience effeciency and effectiveness compete, and there is an inevitable tradeoff (I might blog about that in the coming days).
I like the idea of dynamic mapping and its diagnostic intent. I have tried to achieve this with my business network analysis albeit at the moment it is static - see my Deconstructing Complexity post. I think this example shows it is possible to work out what it is that we need to know. Perhaps that is the real essence of knowledge management?
Regards Graham