Knowledge Management in the Military

Knowledge Management (KM) in the United States (US) Military has been implemented using a top down approach that is resonated through each branch, command, directorate, division, group, battalion, etc. The US Military has established a culture of KM that leverages its personnel, processes and systems to facilitate a consistent flow of knowledge and the mechanisms to execute and make decisions from this knowledge.

It is widely acknowledged that knowledge management (KM) strategy is a desired precursor to developing specific KM initiatives. The US Military has established KM Strategies from the top down in every branch. As this strategy is propagated and aligned through the organization it is often a difficult process due a variety of influences and constraints. These KM influences and constraints include understanding, conflicts with IT organizations, funding, technology usage and configuration, and outsourcing.

Each US Military branch works to overcome barriers to KM adoption. To this effort an establishment of processes and tools, which involves providing approaches and solutions for knowledge sharing has influenced a change in people’s habits. This change will drive values to move US Military organization culture father to overall KM adoption. In support of the US Military in its knowledge sharing efforts, Communities of Practice (CoP) have become an integral method of sharing and distributing knowledge across all branches of the military. In addition enterprise web search capabilities have been implemented to increase “findability” of key content, which is leverage for decision making at all levels of command.

Continuing KM Challenge of BRAC

The US Military has a KM challenge involving Base Realignment and Closures (BRAC). The BRAC specifically represents the challenge of capturing knowledge both tacit and explicit before it leaves a command from personnel shifts and loss due to a BRAC move. The US Military has already experienced this knowledge loss and unless steps are taken at least a year in advance of a BRAC move, this loss will continue to happen. The loss of knowledge has the potential to compromise mission activities and the soldier in theater. Leveraging the US Military’s ability to share knowledge through its established process and tools will help lessen the adverse impact of this knowledge loss. However, without process and tools to capture, catalog, and reuse knowledge, the US Military will be challenged to keep the various commands fully operational and effective long term for the solider in theater.

I am interested to hear from our men and women across the military, this includes active, inactive, reservist as well as civilian personnel who have worked or are currently working with KM. I would like you to share your thoughts about how you are utilizing KM and/or if you feel KM is/will be a benefit for you!

Knowledge Management (KM) in Research Institutions

In a previous post I wrote about KM for Collaboration and Innovation, and in this post I pointed out that research areas are critical to new product creation and the speed to market for new products are essential to stay ahead of your competitors. KM plays a central role not only from the perspective of innovation by knowing what has been done and/or what is being done in other areas of research that can be utilized, but also from the collaboration and knowledge sharing among researchers contributing to the speed of new products to market.

At its core the nature of research is to nurture open access to extensive amounts of tacit knowledge (knowledge within the minds of people) and explicit knowledge (knowledge that is written down) by applying a model that reflects the natural of flow of knowledge. The model of Connect – Collect ---Reuse and Learn depicts a knowledge flow model that supports KM within research institutions and R&D functions within organizations. For KM to work within a research environment (as with other environments) a culture and structure that supports, rewards and proves the value KM can bring will encourage the continued use and adoption of the KM practice.

In addition the choice of IT tools (which is of secondary importance) should be brought in to the organization to automate the knowledge flow and its associated process. The KM tool(s) must support KM goals/strategies, provide a means to connect, collect, catalog, access, and reuse tacit and explicit knowledge. In addition the KM tool(s) must capture new learning to share across the organization, and provide search and retrieval mechanisms to bring pertinent knowledge to the user.

For those who are working in or interacting with research institutions and/or R&D departments I want to hear from you. I look forward to hearing your perspective on what KM is bringing to your world of research!

Where Have My Experts Gone?

Recently I had a conversation with one of my colleagues regarding his organization's loss of critical expertise. As people started to move in and out of the company valuable knowledge gaps appeared. In a statement of exasperation he ask; Where have my experts gone? To address these gaps the organization began hiring short term (6 months or less) expertise to perform specific duties. When these resources moved on the organization was back to square one. This lead him to ask; How can we address this long term? Where can we find experts to fill these positions long term? and... How would you address this issue? Well I guess this is the million dollar question. The first task I told him I would do is to prioritize the areas that have experienced knowledge loss and based on that perform a knowledge audit of the area that has been identified as the higher priority. In addition further knowledge audits should be scheduled for the remaining areas as his organization became more comfortable with executing knowledge audits. I did inform him that the knowledge audit will tell him what specific knowledge gaps exist, who are the current knowledge holders, and what percentage of knowledge is tacit, explicit or both.

Understanding if the knowledge gap is tacit and the specifics of this tacit knowledge would help you determine the type of expertise you need to hire and for how long. In understanding if the knowledge is explicit; your key knowledge holders may have access to this knowledge somewhere in the organization (knowledge repository/portal, network folders, on the shelf, etc.), you may also have the ability to purchase this knowledge or perform research to document this knowledge. I also believe engaging the key knowledge holders when it comes to identifying the "right" personnel to bring in to fill key positions will start to address his concerns around where to find the experts he needs.

I know this is just a start to address his problem I would like to know what others believe he should do and why. In this current economy it's only a matter of time before all of our organizations start to face this same problem!

Capturing Tacit Knowledge

Over the last week there have been messages going back and forth between the members of the Federal Knowledge Management Working Group http://km.gov/  about the ability and validity of being able to capture tacit knowledge and transitioning it to explicit knowledge. The conversation was initiated by Neil Olonoff, Lead Federal Knowledge Management Initiative, Federal KM Working Group. There were many views and opinions voiced on this subject. Some points stand out such as, it is difficult and considered unrealistic to think that you can fully transfer tacit knowledge in its entirety into explicit knowledge, instituting a mentor/protege (apprenticeship) program to transfer tacit knowledge is an optimal way to transition tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge, and are there methods (tools) that can really convert tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge effectively and efficiently.
It has been my experience that you can capture specific kinds of tacit knowledge (declarative, procedural, rules based, ) very effectively and translate it into explicit knowledge and make it available across the enterprise. This knowledge becomes among other things "tips and techniques", "standard operating procedures", and "lessons learned". There are also methods to codify tacit knowledge and that knowledge can be utilized in an expert (knowledge Based) system see UML for Developing Knowledge Management Systems.
Tacit knowledge has been translated into explicit knowledge throughout history, from the ancient Egyptian carvings through storytelling, through the semantic web. Phil Murray, Chief Architect from The Semantic Advantage has an interesting article in KM World: Putting Meaning to Work, that talks about the connectedness we share through semantic networks.
What are your thoughts on this subject? Sharing our knowledge both tacit and explicit is the cornerstone to the success of any knowledge management program!