July 24, 2012

Finding Meaning in the Mumbo–Jumbo

Writing this dissertation has been much harder than I initially thought. I feel like once again, I am being stretched far above my comfort zone. One thing I came to realise thought, is that whatever it is that I may feel like I am going through, someone else has felt the same way. In other words, there is really nothing very new or unique about a lot of our experiences.

One thing I find challenging in browsing through journal articlaes is that frankly, I havent a clue what some of them are going on about! Sometimes, there are a lot of fancy big words, and technical mumbo jumbo that makes it difficult for me to get to the heart of the authors opinions or arguments. So I find myself facing this dilema, I mean how can I make use of knowledge, and effectively analyse and crtitique it if I dont even understand it?

Another problem I have had is the diffuculty of trying to make sense of all the information out there. Frankly, finding homogenuity in the subject area my dissertation is based on (Change Management) has been a bit of a nightmare. It appears that everyone has an opinion and wants to establish a reputation. So there is the desire to at the very least appear to have discovered or unearthed somethng new, a new idea or thought pattern completely different from all others. In a bid to stand out, academics, and researchers have ended up repoducing what sometimes can appear to be quite a jumbled mess of ideas, with very little coherency or areas of commonality. This in essence leads to the literature of the discipline being disfragmented, and I am not certain that this is a good thing.

I am certain a lot of people out there can relate with me. There have been and continue to be days where I feel like frankly, I never want to so much as see another journal article or write up ever again. But then, i shake off those feelings and I press on, because I have to, at least for now.

So here's to hoping that some how, some day (and it certainly has to be soon) all the mess will start to make sense, and I will end up with a research work that is something that I can be proud of even in years to come.

Now i'm off to scan more journals.....cheers


June 10, 2012

People centered or technology centered?

For me personally, figuring out how to implement KM in as aspect of a business was a very tough challenge.

One of the KM issues that i found interesting however, was the differing perspectives on how best to approach and implement knowledge management in organizations. The two major schools of thought; the technology oriented and the people oriented have what can be described as conflicting ideology on what KM should entail.

I became convinced, that a people centric perspective that views technology simply as a tool to achieve effective KM was the better approach. This is beacuse, I feel like this offers a clearer identity to KM as a discipline. The technological approach seems to offer the idea to simply throw technology at the problem, my problem with this is that it didnt appear to me to be knowledge management as much as it appeared to be information systems management. I feel like KM encompases more than that, and I believe that a people centric approach allows for the exploration of KM ideas and practices on a broader scale.


May 13, 2012

How exactly do you manage knowledge?

The hardest thing about managing knowledge, is managing knowledge.

The age long Knowledge management problem of how to accurately and concisely transfer tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is one that still raises a lot of debate and argument. The truth is that, it sounds easy enough in theory. But in reality, it's just not very easy to practice. There is no "10 easy steps to effectively capturing your organizations valuable knowledge" guide. Figuring out where valuable information lies, how to extract it and document it in a manner that allows employees and stakeholders easy access is a difficult and time consuming process. It can even be quite expensive.

This i think is what frustrates me about the knowledge management discipline i think. That there is little or no practical information available on exactly how to solve this problem. There is a lot of theory of what knowledge management should be, but no explicit directions on how it should be done or accomplished.

This is i believe one of the 21st century problems, having data and knowledge that is quite ambiguous, and having to make enough sense out of it that you can make sense of it, and apply it, and achieve results.

One of the many lessons I am learning at Warwick.....


April 27, 2012

Walking the Knowledge Talk

During the he discussion that followed our presentation today, a classmate made a remark about the difficulty of putting into practice what academia and research are able to identify so concisely concerning how to improve organizations.

It made me begin to wonder what some of the challenges of truly implementing knowledge management and encouraging organizational learning in a company may be. In other words, how can companies learn to walk the knowledge management talk?

I think one way might be to tailor it to your company’s specific needs. KM is not just about throwing technology at the KM challenge. It’s about discovering and implementing a solution that works for you. For a small company, KM may mean something as simple as having documents put safely in a location that is secure and can be easily accessed by employees, as well as ensuring that experiential knowledge from experienced workers is formally written down and documented. No fancy hi tech solutions may even be required; OL is a mindset that can be established in a company in order to benefit from good KM practices. If people can see it working and actually making a difference in the way they do their jobs, I am certain it would be far easier to embrace it. Which brings me to my third point about employee engagement, introducing KM in a company is a change effort and must be managed accordingly. It is important that staff understand KM and how it could benefit the organization in order to encourage them to have a sense of ownership towards the practice and to play their own part effectively towards ensuring its introduction becomes a success.

I don't pretend that the gap between academia/science and industry practices can be fully analyzed and resolved in one short blog post. But I would like to think that perhaps I have mentioned one or two areas that require further examination.

The goal of business based research and study after all is at the end of the day to improve businesses.


My assessment of KBAM presentations

Today, we gave our presentations which we have been working on for the past two weeks.

I think it went amazingly well and I genuinely enjoyed all the presentations in one way or the other.

It amazed me to think of how far we have come since our first presentations during the CBE module. It has been a thing of joy to watch my classmates transform, some from being people who could barely speak in front of an audience to becoming more comfortable with public speaking, and seeing others who had been anxious about making presentations in what was a second language to them have it become something they barely acknowledge anymore.

KBAM was tough. Initially, it did feel like we were running around in circles unsure of what we were doing. For me personally, the second i realized that there was no one correct answer to the questions and that it could be tackled in a number of different ways, I felt a freedom to play around with the knowledge I had been able to acquire and try to make sense of it and see how it could be applied meaningfully in an organization.

The hardest part was being able to establish and demonstrate a clear link between knowledge and asset management but i think we did a fair job of that.

It was interesting to me to see how each team approached the same question from slightly different angles. I felt like I was able to gain something new from each presentation as a result.

In all, it was a fun and useful exercise from a learning perspective. I am truly amazed by how much we had learnt in just two weeks like Paul highlighted. Many of us could have spoken comfortably about the topics without frequently referring to the slides. I think this is something that really in itself demonstrates that learning has taken place.


April 24, 2012

To Outsource, or not to Outsource?


My team and I had a very engaging discussion and somewhat heated debate about whether or not to outsource facilities management in the Waveriders Company. Some were for it, others against it and yet others supported outsourcing only certain aspects of it but not others.

The argument against outsourcing was based on two ideas; one that it was too expensive and secondly that the contract company would have access to private company information about the type, value and number of assets the firm possesses. There was concern expressed that this could potentially be risky for the company.

The argument for outsourcing however, was based on the opinion that not outsourcing would imply that the current staff would be responsible for facilities and asset management. The concern was that this would bring in additional job responsibilities to the staff that was outside their job specifications, and would put them under extra pressure having to juggle their normal tasks alongside something as complicated and time consuming as facility and asset management. In this light, outsourcing would be the better option.

Upon further study and reflection, I am beginning to form the opinion that outsourcing in this context, as in every other is something that depends of a number of variables. We would need to examine what exactly we want to outsource and compare the costs and benefits of doing the job in house versus outsourcing it. Issues such as: expertise and technical know -how of Waverider's employees in certain areas comes into consideration. As well as the resources available at present, in this light it may make sense to outsource certain functions but not others.

Eventually, though, we will have to come to an agreement as a group on this issue.

So for now, the big question remains, to outsource, or not to outsource?


April 23, 2012

Knowledge Workers and Everyone Else

Evan Rosen in an article for Bloomberg Businessweek entitled " Every worker is a Knowledge Worker" gives the opinion that the separation of employees into knowledge workers and those who are not knowledge workers (or as he puts it everyone else) is unhealthy for an organizations dynamic.

He argues that this sort of differentiation leads to discrimination not only in terms of pay structures, but also prevents organizations from tapping into the [tacit] knowledge possessed by manual and front line workers. The idea is that floor staff are often overlooked by managers when searching for ideas and opinions from employees about the company's performance and how to improve.

While I do understand where Rosen is coming from, I do disagree about his suggestion that manual staff are overlooked as a result of the differentiation between knowledge workers and other employees.

It can easily be argued that this sort of differentiation has existed in organizations even before the term 'knowledge workers' was introduced by Peter Drucker in 1969. Managers tend to seek strategic input from highly skilled staff, the assumption being that they are better educated and thus are more likely to have more comprehensive insight and understanding of the company's business process, the dynamics and interactions between processes and their overall implications for the company. In other words, the big picture.

Whether or not this assumption is always accurate or even true is debatable, but, I see the phenomenon Rosen describes as an issue of differentiating between highly skilled workers, who are more likely to be in managerial level and low skilled workers who are more often than not not in positions of management, although exceptions apply in some cases. Rather than an issue that was created by the distinction between 'knowledge workers' from other employees as Rosen appears to imply.

Article Link: http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/jan2011/ca20110110_985915.htm


April 20, 2012

The Planning Fallacy

In going through the literature I could find about judgement biases, I came across quite a few outside of what we had covered during the module. One of the biases that struck me was the Planing Fallcy.

A Planning Fallacy is a cognitive bias that results in decision makers failing to accurately estimate the amount of time they require to complete a task. It is closely linked to Optimism bias, because for Planning Fallcay to occur, a level of optimism must be felt by the decision maker. Planning fallacy results in projects being finished well behind schedule because the decision makers were overly optimistic about their speed of progress and failed to properly consider the possibility of set backs.

One famous example of Planning Fallacy was in the making of the James Cameron movie, Titanic. The movie was reportedly finished over a year behind schedule and went over the budget by more that double the initial estimates. costing the studio about $200 million.

Personally, I can cite some examples of planning fallacy in my life. Everytime I find myself scrambling to complete a PMA closer to the deadline than is advisable or rushing into class a minute before it begins I beleive it means I have fallen victim to the planning fallacy.

I can only imagine how much resources and money is lost by organizations when employees engage in planning fallacy. I don't have an exact figure, but I am sure it is significant.


Manage Knowledge, Save Costs

Upon first inspection, the fields of knowledge and asset management appear unconnected, or at least not directly so. One for many years has been viewed only in terms of records and archives and the other about managing tangible company property and equipment’s.

However, the rise of the knowledge economy has led to the realization that knowledge, just like finance, employees and property is also an asset that is just as valuable as any other.

A 2011 article in Business Finance by Nicole Stempak linked knowledge and records management with asset, risk and costs management.

In essence, the idea is that in managing a company's records effectively, i.e. data and information collection, categorization, protection and provision of access can help to manage business risks, for example, the risk of valuable company information being leaked to competitors. In terms of costs management, I would imagine that for manufacturing and engineering organizations for example, the ability to capture lessons learnt from previous processes and make that knowledge available to future work efforts will save time spent looking for relevant data and ultimately, costs for the company.

I'm linking this up with what I learnt during the PEUSS PMA writing process about the importance of being able to manage knowledge effectively in the engineering process as company's tend to spend money carrying out for example experiments that had been done in the past again because the knowledge generated from the previous one had been lost. I can only imagine the financial and time implications of this unhealthy practice.

It is one that could be ended by the adoption of good knowledge management practices.

Article Link: http://businessfinancemag.com/article/managing-records-means-managing-assets-risks-and-cost-0726


April 18, 2012

Reverse groupthink?

It is interesting how Groupthink can creep up in group decision making process without any of the present members even realizing it. Even when members are aware of the existence of the phenomenon, it can and still does occur in groups.

I have to admit that upon hearing about groupthink for the first time during the RDM module, I thought to myself that it sounded like basic common sense. People often find them selves succumbing to the majority opinions or at least the opinions of one or two more vocal members of a group at the expense of their own thoughts or ideas about an issue. I believe it exists in some form as Peer Pressure. I wondered why there had been a need to identify it as a separate social phenomenon, complete with its own eight symptoms.

But upon further study and reflection, I realised what a huge and significant impact Groupthink could have on the decision making of a group and even in certain serious cases led to the loss of lives due to faulty group decisions.

However, groupthink appears to often be discussed in more or less a negative light. Like something group members and teams must take all effort to avoid at all costs. it made me wonder if groupthink could ever be in fact a positive thing.

I wonder, what if group think leads to a positive outcome or a more robust decision making process? What i mean to say is; Groupthink is defined for example as a phenomenon where groups make faulty decisions as a result of group pressures. Well, is it possible that a group might make correct decisions also as a result of group pressures? and if this happened, would this still be considered groupthink?


November 2014

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Oct |  Today  |
               1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Search this blog

Tags

Galleries

Most recent comments

  • Not true at all. http://www.tacitconnexions.com …... Knowledge Engineering and Management: The Com… by James Gunn on this entry
  • very true. but i also think that large and successful firms do consider inculcating this philosophy … by Abdul Iqbal on this entry
  • practically been going through the EFQM framework, we are gradually learning. But i concur with you … by Abdul Iqbal on this entry
  • I think that one thing that many companies fail to understand is that improving business is not abou… by Ilektra-maria Kaldi on this entry
  • my opinion on outsourcing is one where i think it makes process pretty easier and faster.also the is… by Oghenetega Inoni on this entry

Blog archive

Loading…
RSS2.0 Atom
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXIV