Politics and the Diversity of Thought

I know it has been some time since my last posting. Since then one significant event in particular has occurred that was foreseen on the horizon; is that we now have a Republican controlled House. With this control comes a new found revelation (as if this is new) that there must be a sharing of power and the willingness to collaborate to move this country forward. The fact that collaboration is something that has been forced to happen I personally see as a good thing! This should have been the mode of operation from day one. President Obama came into office with the mantra of change and the notion of working “across the aisle” to bring about this change and to bring a new perspective in the way we govern.


Now it is time for everyone to open their minds to the possibilities of the diversity of thought this new found collaboration can bring. Is the latest tax compromise a glimpse into the type of results that can come from this era of collaboration? Is this tax compromise good for the country? Will this collaboration continue? It is my hope that the results of collaboration and leveraging the diversity of thought in our political arena will be a catalyst for the type change we believed we were getting when this new administration came into office.

I welcome your thoughts….

Why do Knowledge Management (KM) Initiatives Fail?

The following blog post is by my guest blogger - David Schneider - I look forward to your comments:

Why do Knowledge Management (KM) Initiatives Fail?


The fact is that few knowledge management initiatives are successful. But, why is this result? What is the cause and effect? Is it because under qualified professional? Or is their more to it than that? What about a magic “silver bullet”? Is a cultural issue?

I believe the reason why knowledge management initiatives fail are varied as there are stars in the sky. I believe one of the main reasons knowledge management initiatives fail is based on how the organization views knowledge management. Knowledge Management is viewed just as a function of the call center. KM is more than a function of a call center and its benefits are far reaching as any Lean process or any other initiatives a corporation take put into practice. KM is mainly viewed by most corporations that have a KM effort as a cost of doing business. This is an error in philosophy, KM is a method of reducing expenses, improve productivity, and enhancing value.

KM will improve efficiencies that will increase a corporations’ profitability, enhances the quality of work, performance, and overall value of the corporation. KM allows tacit knowledge to be leveraged, transferred to increase the quality of work performed across the corporation. This tacit knowledge allows KM to eliminate the “reinvent the wheel” syndrome. This transfer of knowledge is the essence of knowledge management.

Outside of a corporations’ philosophy error there are several reasons for KM initiatives fail. Some of those reasons are as follows:

• Expecting KM technologies to replace KM processes or create processes where none exists.

• Lack of participation from all levels of a corporation.

• Forcing inadequate processes into new technology.

• Lack of maintenance and resources after initial standup.

• Lack of education and understanding of what KM means to the individual.

• KM does not become ingrained into the corporations work culture.

• Lack of involvement in creating and evolving KM content.

• Lack of metrics to measure the impact of KM on the corporation or insufficient/incorrect metrics being captured.

• Lack of monitoring and controls in place to ensure the knowledge is relevant and is current and accurate.

KM initiatives are essential to a corporations’ growth and is more than just the cost of doing business. Successful KM initiatives once completed and funded correctly it increase a corporations’ profitability, enhance the quality of work, and overall value of the corporation.

David Schneider
dschneider1023@yahoo.com