This article provides a nice counter-point to the low-cost klog network. The article concludes that:
Here’s the bottom line:
– for specialist communication between specialist groups, KM is a great idea
– for broader, much more useful communication across an entire enterprise, KM will not work very efficiently unless you implement a major awareness program
Wait a minute. This is beginning to sound expensive. I thought you could implement KM for $40 a desk.
This is a great piece to read if you are susceptable to being dazzled by the possiblities of technology (which certainly happens to me quite often).
The conclusion that the deployment of KM with cheap or free tools is still expensive is based on the requirements of senior level buy-in and staff training needed in order to deploy KM tools across the enterprise. These are items that a grass-roots implementation most likely lack.
I think there is an assumption at the base of that idea, however. The assumption is that KM solutions must be applied consistently across the entire organization in order to be doing KM well. Why? Can’t a solution or tool be used by a small group within the enterprise and derive value and benefit from it? Does the entire company have to be wired into a KM network in order to consider a KM initiative a success?
Perhaps KM can only happen among small, informal groups within the organization. There have not been many success stories from enterprise-level deployments of KM systems. Maybe truly valuable knowledge sharing only happens with informal swarming connections and rapid permutations thereof.
I’m just thinking out loud here. I do believe that training is very important but probably less so than having an organizational culture that at a minimum does not actively discourage the sharing of information and knowledge.
I’m very interested in hearing some other opinions on micro vs. macro KM.