And now The Mentalist shares his wisdom...

“Long before we stuffed knowledge into graphs and charts, we used older, and in some cases more entertaining ways to remember things.  Grids, Lists and Classification is a nice way of organizing things.  But it is not the way the world works; and it is certainly not the way the brain works.” ~ Patrick Jane in “The Mentalist”

Predictive Analytics and Big Data are the buzz words making the rounds today, as organizations – especially online organizations try to get better at predicting customer tastes and preferences.  The entire supply-chain then bends backwards trying to fulfil the prophecy, and works overtime making and stocking the shelves with what has been forecast.  In an earlier post, I had mentioned about the over-dependence on data – grids, lists, charts and graphs – the elusive hunt for that pattern which reveals how a whole host of people are thinking or what is influencing their purchase decisions.  No doubt, all of this is very useful. Today, the ability to collect, collate and analyse data from so many different sources has gotten better.  However, I suspect the ability to interpret this in a meaningful manner – has somewhat diminished – decision makers are trying to replace the critical element of personal knowledge, emanating from skills and experience with mechanically interpreted data.

So, I am drawn into wondering how personal knowledge that emanates from skill and experience can coexist with the interpretations and conclusions that we draw from charts and graphs.  Do they predict the same thing – or are they too many variables for either of them to be reasonably accurate.  More importantly, how can the two work together to improve the ratio of successful predictions.  Like the apocryphal story about the old worker who charges $100 to fix a boiler by tapping it with a  hammer (read that here) where personal knowledge is shown as being extremely important, to the other story about Wal-Mart placing diapers next to beer because sales patterns revealed increase in sales (read it here) where analytics is shown to be the hero – we are left wondering where the twain can meet.

Personal knowledge – that intricate mix of learning, practice, sharing and experiencing – is what goes into creating organizational knowledge.  The ability of the expert to share that knowledge in a vivid and memorable manner enables the organization to embed that knowledge – institutionalize it.  In a similar manner, when patterns emerge from the way the organization interacts with its ecosystem, the ability to identify it, and make it available to the expert to create another memorable story is what analytical tools should become good at.  A picture is worth a thousand words – they say; with data visualization getting better by the day, it should be possible to create memorable images that then become stories that get embedded as part of organization’s knowledge. 

Have you come across any graphs or charts that have helped you change the way you work?

Knowledge Sharing - Lessons from Grey's Anatomy

“Dr. Richard, today’s lecture day…and I have one open spot”.

I had been idly surfing channels on a lazy Sunday afternoon, when for no particular reason I paused to see what this all about.  It was a scene from the American medical drama television series Grey’s Anatomy stopped me in my tracks.  It seemed like it was right out of some Knowledge Management lecture, that I was tempted to sit and watch more.  Here are some interesting insights and thoughts that occurred to me as I watched this episode.

“You brought back lecture day?”  

Probably an age-old custom of this hospital which quietly disappeared as people became too busy to learn.  So, Dr. Richard seems rather incredulous when he is offered a slot to speak – which incidentally happens to be his “swan song” lecture.  Very often, good initiatives that were intended to create knowledge, promote best practices, and stimulate collaboration peter off into meaningless ritual – more because of apathy than because there is nothing to be gained from it.  The very senior management that initiated such good practice within the organization often end up sabotaging it by pulling out people from such activity, thereby sending a strong signal that it is after all “not that important”.  Of course the flip side to it is just that – it becomes a ritual – something to be gotten over and done with – the inability to inspire people to tell a good story often rings the death knell for such initiatives.

·         “We are a teaching hospital.  We learn by doing.  We can also…should also learn from others’ experiences.  Their mistakes saves you mistakes…their losses saves you losses…their victories will inspire yours. “

Every organization needs to have some form of formal learning mechanism; be it classroom led lectures, webinars, blended learning models or a pot-pourri of other learning technologies, the one sure-fire way to ensure that the lessons learned from an organization’s experience need to be shared so that everyone can learn and benefit from it.  With a rapidly ageing workforce, especially in some of the older industries, a lot of knowledge that was gained through the experience of people who have done the same kind of tasks for over 20 to 30 years seems to be going away.  In the medical field, for example, where doctors could just look at patients and make an intelligent diagnosis, today’s physicians need the aid of scans and images, blood samples and what have you, to make a tentative guess of what the probably symptom could be.  How can organizations preserve that expertise and skill gained from the experience of so many years of work?

"Eyes forward and pay attention. If you are caught dozing you get chalk on your face. Ask Dr Yang! my aim is exceptional.  If you answer right you get a chocolate! "

Although Dan Pink may disagree, at least during the initial stages, the carrot and stick approach often is quite a strong driver to ensure that there is sufficient participation in such initiatives.  While, of course, as can be seen, chocolates are seen more as a means to make it interactive and fun, rather than sit back and snooze off without getting caught.  The other interesting aspect is that Dr. Miranda Bailey makes it very interactive by inviting the audience to become real characters in her story.  As the story unfolds we see other doctors actually trying to guess how the story would end.  Goes without saying that for knowledge to get strongly embedded a good story that can hold it together is an important aspect.

"Single most important step in the treatment process…patient history…thank you. Catch…"

Dr. Miranda Bailey quizzes the audience on what they think is the most important aspect of diagnosis.  Knowledge is about knowing…and what better way to know than to understand what has happened.  In business parlance, that would translate to looking at the information available so we get a measure of the issue on hand.  Quite often, this will also involve going back in time to identify trends and patterns that could indicate what could potentially be the problem.  This, in essence, is where experience meets data – where the numbers tell the story which forms on the basis of experience and skill….more about this another 

   “…..every test I could think of – negative.  I did what I told you all to do when you are stuck.  I hit the books. I hit them hard"

A good knowledge repository is like “sitting on the shoulder of giants”.  In present day context, knowledge repositories enable two aspects of knowing – it connects people to people – helps you identify the experts; it also connects people to content – enables you discover content.  When an organization’s knowledge base is organized well around a well-defined taxonomy, then discovering content, connecting content to content, and people to content becomes easy.  It makes the prospect of “hitting the books hard” a pleasurable exercise.

 "If you looked further and talked to the patient…your patient who has been sliced nine ways to Sunday has porphyria…you know the difference between you and me…I learned."

As organizations get adaptive and responsive, they are building a knowledge ecosystem that brings in all players in the ecosystem to collaborate and come up with a solution.  The customer (in this case the patient) is often the one best equipped to provide you with inputs and insight that could lead to innovation and process / product improvement.  Keeping the communication lines open and collaborating with the customer is as much if not a more important aspect of knowledge sharing than any other I can think 

"Good Morning! Once upon a time long before I was chief of surgery, I was a resident…just like you.  You learn from everything in your residency. But you don’t realize how much you learn from each other. Look around…the biggest influences in your life are sitting next to you…in this room"

The one who shares knowledge best, is the one who can tell a story well.  And here, we have Dr. Richard telling a compelling story – and even better – exhorting the doctors to rely on each other, share ideas and collaborate.  The biggest influences in your life, are after all the people you get to see every day, and spend quite a lot of time with.  If you cannot rely on them to enhance your skill and experience, who else will be able to do that.  The most important lesson in knowledge sharing is about getting your team and your colleagues to inspire your victories…and learn from your losses.  This is clearly a message that needs to be driven home strongly in every organization that intends to 

The Hippocratic oath (The declaration of  Geneva)

This aspect of knowledge sharing I see whenever I interact with microfinance and self-help groups.  The self-help groups and joint liability groups develop a strong sense of sisterhood (more than 90% of borrowers are women)! J  And one way they do this is to wear uniforms and take a pledge at every group meeting.  Over time, this helps create a strong sense of identify and also helps in bonding.  While the Doctor’s oath, is slightly different, it sort of reinforces the inherent need to practice their profession with conscience and dignity.   

Watching this episode I got the impression that there were several important lessons one could take away and it touched upon the essence of Knowledge Management.  It also brought to fore the art of storytelling as a key tool of Knowledge sharing. Do you know of any other tele serial from which there were some nice knowledge nuggets you took away?   

Note: Grey’s Anatomy is an American medical drama television series.  You can find more information about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey%27s_Anatomy . This was Episode 15 of Season 6 titled Time Warp. 

Smoke on the water

The river, as it meanders through the plains gathers momentum, and then falls from great heights crashing down on the rocks below creating a misty spray; this process effectively transforms a small part of the gushing river to its almost elemental state of water droplets. They soon gather themselves and continue their journey downstream.

Observing this phenomenon at Hogenakkal, I was reminded of a question someone asked me recently, on how tacit knowledge becomes explicit in an organization? In other words, when does personal knowledge of an individual become organizational knowledge? In his magnum opus, Personal KnowledgePolanyi talks about the 'knowledge continuum' between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge.

Knowledge can be categorized into three broad categories based on how it impacts business:

• Process-related
• Organization and Culture-related
• Tools (Information technology)

Broadly speaking, all business performance is streamlined into tasks, procedures, processes with measures to determine how it is impacting the business. For example, revenue v/s target is an indication of how close the business is towards achieving its sales objectives. The underlying processes provide the mechanism to achieve that, which in today's world, for the most part is executed through tools (CRM / ERP, etc). So, we also measure process performance to assess the efficiency or effectiveness of the process. The productivity of the personnel who execute these processes are also measured to enable improvement in their performance.

The second aspect relating to organization and culture is largely defined by:

• Skills and level of mastery
• Work environment
• Training and Development
• Motivation factors

Post-industrial era has seen a large change in the work environment, and the behavioral characteristics of the workforce. A recent Gallup report described the current workforce to consist of more than 40% of knowledge workers, which is growing every year. The standard motivational factors that motivated industrial era workers do not work in this environment any longer. Daniel Pink, in his book A Whole New Mind, talks of the death of Management principles that were based on Taylor's measurement techniques, largely because there is less and less work that is monotonous and requires just a pair or arms or legs.

As we have seen, culture has also been significantly influenced by Technology and tools that have helped in breaking silos and bridging chasms - creating the ability to collaborate across boundaries. Tools come with integral collaboration capability and workflows that support seamless involvement of people across tasks. 

So, how can the impact of KM be measured on the organization?

• The impact of Knowledge on the business process, as measured by metrics which determine underlying causes for the change in business measures
• The inter-relation of these underlying causes which can be attributed to change in skills, work environment, learning and motivation factors
• The impact of tools in enabling change in culture - creating a collaborative and connected community

In the absence of clear metrics that link business performance to changes in process, the impact of implementing Knowledge Management in an organization on creating greater cohesion, collaboration and ability to reach out to a larger community will have to be used as an indirect measure on the overall improvement in the business.

For example:

• How can we relate activities at the two ends of the knowledge spectrum - a user accessing a procedure document or content in the knowledge repository to tacit knowledge which is measured as conversations that occur in the collaborative work-space;
• Or the ability of the Knowledge environment to bridge the transition from personal knowledge to organizational knowledge by connecting a seeker of knowledge to an expert on the subject
• measuring the decibel levels in a community or discussion forum to associated change in processes - which result from the community making innovative changes in the way the business process is executed

These by themselves will have no direct impact on business performance. However, they are the cogs in the wheels which turn bigger wheels which result in generating huge momentum and force. Viewed in isolation, it may not be possible to determine their end impact, but recognizing the role in the overall work environment will definitely help in ensuring that organizations organize themselves towards a knowledge-driven strategy for growth and sustainability.

So back to my original question: at what point does personal knowledge become organizational knowledge? I think the SECI model proposed by Nonaka provides a framework in which to understand this transformation. Technology and the rapid adoption of social media tools in the work-place has enabled us understand this phenomenon better.

What do you think?

It’s (knowledge about) the Customer, Stupid!

 

"Salesforce CEO admits 'social enterprise' pitch didn't work. Apparently no one knew what 'social enterprise' meant – not even the guys who coined the term." (http://www.zdnet.com/salesforce-ceo-admits-social-enterprise-pitch-didnt-work-7000023336/)

This article by Rachel King for Between the Lines
caught my attention for its validation of a fundamental premise – that the much-hyped term would do little to push the case for business unless it could deliver value in tangible terms. A tool's value would be determined by whether it was fit-for-purpose. The problem with most "me"-centric terms is that they get caught up in the narcissistic web of looking at how they become the centre of attention. And in the process fail to meet their raison d'être – to serve the customer.

Marc Benioff has moved on to a new term – the Internet of Customers. And at least this time, the focus is on the customer – and hopefully, this coinage will probably have a longer and more useful lifespan than the declaration at Dreamforce 2011. It has become quite clear that collaboration and social media tools without any specific purpose do not really end up being very useful knowledge tools. While there may be traction in terms of getting people to create some chatter, the real value that one gets from providing direction to the conversation is missing.

I think it is this perspective that Marc Benioff seems to have gotten right the second time around, with the launch Salesforce One, and the "Internet of Customers" pitch. Here, clearly, the focus is away from product-centric statements that highlight messaging prowess, and instead focuses on what it can do for the customer. This was highlighted during a recent conversation with my good friend Sukumar Rajagopal, when he spoke about bringing "purpose" into the equation when implementing KM initiatives at Cognizant. From the initial thrust of generating a buzz – primarily through getting people to participate in social media, the focus shifted towards innovation as the reason for KM activities. This clearly ups the ante in terms of engaging people in conversations that have a clear purpose. What also becomes apparent is that it is not about the tool or the employee – it is about his participation in making a difference to the customer. The interesting aspect is that this also enables performance measurement. We are able to clearly identify if the KM initiative is headed in the right direction.

How well-defined is the purpose of your KM initiative? Share your feedback.

 

Making Organizational Learning stick

This post has been stuck for a while in the space between the keyboard and the fingers…more out of inertial than anything else.

How can a learning organization ensure that its organization learning methodologies are being put to good use? In an organization that is steadily climbing up the knowledge maturity curve, chances are that they will have a very structured knowledge repository and processes that enable this knowledge repository to get populated with content periodically. It is also highly likely that they have the tools and mechanisms in place for knowledge exchange on a social platform. And most definitely, they will have a formal learning program in place that enables employees continuously upgrade their skills and competencies.

How does one put all of this in perspective, such that each of the programs feeds the other, and there is tangible evidence of social learning that is occurring in the organization?

When enterprises are able to integrate formal e-learning methodologies with social collaboration, a social learning platform emerges. What this means is that the e-learning tool becomes an integral part of the social collaboration environment. For example, if it were possible for me:

1. to follow up a post with a short quiz
   
2. or conduct a survey
   

It would enable the organization get a sense of the level of understanding of the context and concepts underlying the article.

In a dynamic learning environment, I would be able to :

• Discover similar stories and notes
  
• Manage an ordered list of similar topics
  
• Test my understanding by taking tests or quizzes
  
• Look up a hint or follow a link in response to a question that I got wrong
  
• Read up content for more insight into a particular topic
  
• Identify an expert on the subject and get into a private conversation
  
• Join a discussion forum or a Community of practice in this domain
  

From an organization perspective, this kind of a learning environment would enable the organization:

• To go beyond structured learning methodologies
  
• Discover topics and subjects that are of interest to a larger section of the organization
  
• Identify niche subjects where expertise is scarce and develop a Community of Practice around that
  
• Discover experts in the organization and make them available to a larger group of people
  

Such a tool would have the following capabilities:

• Provide the capability to frame questions around a topic
  
• Enable objective and subjective responses to a question
  
• Provide the capability to conduct a survey or a poll
  
• Allow users to discover related topics to a response
  
• Provide valuable insights into organizational learning capabilities based on the responses
  

NEPHILA, integrated with marksplus has the ability to integrate Organizational learning to Knowledge Management thus enabling the enterprise become a learning organization.

 

Camel or horse: Wisdom of the crowds

"A Camel is a horse designed by a committee" – so goes the old saying. However, Gen Y believes differently; with online communities becoming a powerful way of sourcing information, collaboration and co-creation is becoming the preferred way of working. In 2005, the word "Crowdsourcing" was coined – a portmanteau word originating from "Crowd" and "Outsourcing".
"Crowdsourcing is the process of obtaining needed services, ideas or content, by soliciting from a large group of people, and especially from an online community."
~Source: Wikipedia
In his book, Crowdsourcing, Brabham classified crowdsourcing into the following types:

• Knowledge Discovery and Management: Where an online community is tasked with the responsibility of collecting and collating information relating to a particular topic. For example, when I put out an online question asking people of a Knowledge community for their definition of knowledge management, I am collating the different responses from group members, identifying key words used in the definition, the frequency of occurrence of specific key words, to come up with a definition that best expresses Knowledge Management.
  Interdisciplinary annotations and trends are yet another example of using the crowdsourcing approach to emergent semantic networks (a network that represents relationships between two concepts – for example, ontology and taxonomy, knowledge and intelligence)
• Distributed Human Intelligence Tasking: This is actually more of micro-task management. A large task is split up into smaller components and distributed across several people. This is then assembled to arrive at the final objective. Analysis of large data sets is usually carried out this way. Large projects which can be deconstructed into micro-projects are also usually crowd-sourced, with people bidding for the smaller projects. Organizations which have formal tie-ups with Universities as part of their University-Industry Linkage, have been known to adopt this approach.
• Broadcast Search: Ideation problems typically fall into this category. This is also what we usually find in online communities and forums. When people have a specific problem, they broadcast their question to the online community, for example, StackOverFlow, and then review the results to decide on the best result. This kind of problem usually has a definite answer – for example, "Why does 'Tour De Flex' show I am not connected to the internet, although I am online".
• Creative Production: The most famous example is possibly Threadless (https://www.threadless.com/make/submit/). This company encourages you to submit designs for t-shirts, and you get paid whenever a t-shirt manufacturing company selects your design for mass production. This is usually done when we need a creative design, not necessarily a single correct answer, and we end up asking the community for ideas. When Lays reached a plateau in sales, they turned to crowdsourcing ideas for new flavors – a competition resulted in several ideas for new flavors coming up from amateur flavor experts – housewives and children – reviving flagging sales by introduction of new flavors.

So, is all social collaboration Crowdsourcing. In a very loose manner of speaking, any collaboration that involves people outside a formally defined team can be called crowdsourcing. However, where the results cannot be quantified or substantiated as having been derived specifically as a result of participation of external resources, it cannot be called Crowdsourcing.
What are the characteristics of a Social Collaboration tool that supports Crowdsourcing?

• Online participation: The most fundamental aspect of course, is that the participation happens beyond the borders of an organization (or a business unit, in the case of very large organizations).
• Context: Crowdsourcing is most effective when there is a definite context in which participation occurs. Examples are:
  • A problem or issue that requires resolution, and internal sources may not have the requisite experience or know-how to address the issue
  • Data or Content Collection and collation: Used for obtaining data from a large group of people, which is collated. For example, research citations and profiling
  • Survey: Polls or surveys conducted to obtain data from a large source of people which is then used for research and analysis
• Platform: Ideation or Innovation platforms – this is usually organized around a domain or topic – where idea generation is the objective. The idea generation can take many forms – suggestion box, prototype presentations, contests – the platform usually supports reward and recognition mechanisms
• Micro-tasking – This is usually a specific configuration of generic crowd-sourcing tools – where the key functionality of project or task management will exist. However, the focus is on being able to generate participation externally, and the task is of a nature where it can be distributed.

Managing knowledge through Communities of Practice

A Community is defined as a social or other group sharing common characteristics or interests, and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists. In the organizational context, a Community of Practice (CoP) is a group sharing common interests or profession in a particular domain. The community evolves through the sharing of knowledge and experiences, learning from each other, and building tight bonds as a community on account of such shared interests. Of course, some organizations create these communities (as a task force) with a specific objective of gaining knowledge in a specific domain.

The key characteristics of a Community of Practice are:

• The domain in which the CoP situates itself
  
• The members of the community
  
• The practice
  

Domain is defined by who participates and who is a member; participation evolves over time through engagement and is further refined by alignment to a common shared vision. Some communities are self-organizing – it evolves based on the level of engagement and participation, the relationships it develops, and the shared experiences that become part of the way it works over a period of time. In some cases, they work within a framework or structure, and build their network of relationships along the way. A central organizing body usually formed from among the community members itself, defines the broad framework within which they operate, and define the vision for the community.

The practice itself defines what the community does, the value it creates, the actual practice it sustains and develops, and how it grows through the development of these practices. A community distinguishes itself from the larger society within which they operate by the boundaries they create – usually defined by relationships, connections and artefacts that they develop. It therefore stands to reason that for a Community of Practice to be successful, it has to develop around a common agenda, be able to engage and participate through shared experiences, and members need to develop a sense of accountability towards the community. Each community develops its own mechanism and process for knowledge creation and transfer; a community lacking foundational knowledge in its domain is likely to be able to sustain itself, since the concept of shared knowledge or experiences will be minimal or non-existent.

How can organizations empower strong and meaningful communities of practice that will be sustainable and create value?

• A Community of practice is based on shared experiences. This will essentially come from participation of its members. Recognition of member's participation will encourage active involvement which eventually will help build relationships across the community. An active community is able to draw in more members to its fold, enhance the level of participation, capture and build its repository of shared experiences, which eventually becomes the knowledge that the community shares with the rest of the organization.
  
• A community that has greater locality – not necessarily geographically, but in terms of shared interests, is more likely to sustain itself because of the sharper focus of the mutuality of their engagement. The commonality of beliefs and values, and the knowledge thus generated will carry more meaning for the community which set itself on a self-sustaining cycle.
  
• Learning and passing on common memories is essential to the power of practice. Community members become invested in other members through this common learning activity. Some examples of such learning are:
  
  • Codified knowledge in the form of user manuals, processes and written procedures
    
  • Rituals and shared beliefs which may even be part of the culture. For example, Friday 'brown-bag lunches' is a common ritual carried out in some organizations where members of the community get together, away from the work environment, to share their experiences and learn from each other.
    
  • Teaching and structured content which is prepared and delivered to members. In the technology-driven world, webinars are a means of engaging the community through structured presentations.
    
  • Everyday practice by the members – Members of the community develop a strong sense of bonding by actively engaging themselves in the code they have formed within themselves. For example, a CoP that prides itself on developing clear coding standards, diligently applies the learning and rules evolved by the community. This eventually leads to organizational level standards – sometimes extending to an international standard itself.
    
  • Enterprise activity that engages the members on a daily basis – this is usually driven by the enterprise itself to engage the members in an active manner. It could mean creation of surveys, polls, quizzes and other activities that will draw out participation and make the community a vibrant organism that is able to interact and contribute to the larger society in which it exists in a very dynamic environment.
    

  While the core principles that drive a Community of Practice are very much culture oriented, technology can play an important role in making it sustainable and available beyond geographic limitations. Active participation, however, will depend on how dynamic and participatory the individual members are.
  

  
   

  How do Communities of Practice operate in your organization? How effective are they in driving strategy?