Why Doesn’t the ‘Knowledge Management’ Community Get it?
I’m kicking off 2012 with a couple of things I just don’t get. Here’s the first one: Why is it that people discussing ‘knowledge management’ seem to have so little understanding of the core know-how actually needed to run (and change) day-to-day business activity? Core operational know-how consists of business vocabulary, business policies, and business rules. That ‘knowledge’ is currently locked away in IT applications and platforms (or in people’s heads) where it is virtually immune to change. That’s a boon to service providers and IT departments, but a bane to business agility. What business really needs today is agile governance … but few seem to be talking about that. P.S. Social media won’t help much here. You simply have to ‘do’ business rules.Tags: business agility, business governance, Business Rules, governance, know-how, knowledge, knowledge management, social media
Ronald G. Ross
Ron Ross, Principal and Co-Founder of Business Rules Solutions, LLC, is internationally acknowledged as the “father of business rules.” Recognizing early on the importance of independently managed business rules for business operations and architecture, he has pioneered innovative techniques and standards since the mid-1980s. He wrote the industry’s first book on business rules in 1994.
Md Santo
| #
BUSINESS RULES MUST COMPLY WITH KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Simply put Knowledge Management (KM) as subject behaving consciousness and let KM treats the other management tools types as well as the business rules within our enterprise as objects and pasive behavior to get under orchestration of KM
Our point of view based on Human System Biology-Based KM (HSBKM) model framework which generate our eclective definition of K and KM among others, … Knowledge Management (KM) essentially is not management technique but behaving “more as a living access mechanisms that can be used across any management tool type (or business rules) such as Total Quality Management, Learning Organization (Peter Senge’s Fifth Discipline), HRM, Benchmarking, Process Classification Framework, Business Process Reengineering, Balanced Scorecard, Business Intelligence, Information Management including Social Media platforms etc. wherein each with their specific functions to be orchestrated under KM’s consciousness. So, here we put KM in incredibly broad meaning behaving as subject with higher level than any other management tool type which is treated only as object”…. ( Visit our URL http://bit.ly/s9ZNqR – “Basic structure of Human System Biology-based Knowledge Management (HSBKM) model framework” and http://bit.ly/s4USV0 – Web and HSBKM-based Enterprise Knowledge Infrastructure map )
And last but not least, KM must good in “doing the right thing” rather than “doing the thing right” as business rules do
Md Santo – http://gravatar.com/mdsanto
Ronald G. Ross
| #
Dunno. Seems a little vague. Organizations today face trememdous risk of loosing know-how. Business rules offer a pragmatic, proven solutions.
Md Santo
| #
Regarding the risk issues you just mentioned, from my point of view, complexity actually representing organizational constraints and on the other side is the organizational entropy representing organizational uncertainties. The essence of complexity management is to seeking optimization and/or balance between constraints (complexity) and uncertainties (entropy).
To coping tremendous risk of loosing know-how, in practice we put Risk Management (RM) as “doing things right” representing organizational complexity counterparting Change Management (CM) or Manage Change as “doing things right”also to representing uncertainties or organizational entropy. Optimization or seeking balance between RM and CM, is the function of KM by “doing right thing” and KM hopefully will make it “a pragmatic proven solutions”
Our URL http://bit.ly/jPPncC showing the effort in managing complexity of Process Classification Framework (PCF)-based Banking Risk Management
James Gunn
| #
Hi Ron,
We “knowledge managers” certainly deserve our share of criticism and you’re right, we’re guilty of wistful thinking in many cases – experience shows that building it doesn’t make them come and culture change is difficult whether it is a KM project or something else. Where I do disagree with you is that information systems currently contain any knowledge !
Since knowledge needs context and information and context is a moving target, information systems can only contain any knowledge on the day of design (not rollout). If you believe as I do that knowledge and expertise are much closer in meaning than knowledge and information then you’ll agree that it is difficult to make information systems do the job of “knowledge systems”. Bring on the Semantic Web then ! ?
BWs
James
Graham Westwood
| #
I think your comment is right on. Talking about change is easy, making it happen is hard. Part of the problem is as you infer, that there are few effective levers management can pull on to effect change. … Digital Knowledge Hubs eliminate or mask the complexity and clutter (process fog) that makes change so difficult.