June 06, 2010
When talking Knoweldge management; the word - knowledge usually stands for different meaning in each
individual's mnd. Whilst some believe knoweldge only involve the one which is able to generate value or profit
to the company whilst others take any experience or opinions from each individuals as knoweldge since
the influecnce of knoweldge usually is unable to foresee.
Moreover, the issue of knoweldge can also be categorisied into two groups - one is the the knoweldge for science
or process which is easily to epxress and reproduce; and the more implicit one is the knowledge like experience or
know-how that is hard to express or copy by others. Whilst the former one can be store and convey to others
with ease in Knowledge Management system, the later one usually is the major barrier for the KM even this
often possesse higher value than the former one.
Even intangible asset like knowledge won't wear out or reduce the amount if a person apply it like physical
assets - everyone can apply same knowledge to acquire the identical result; which usually encourage the
widespread of the knowledge. The noteworthy point of knowledge sharing here is that value of the knowledge
would be still decreased as more people apply the knowledge (eg. pattern).
Therefore, in order to maintain one's superior position and making him/herself irreplaceableto the organisation;
this is usually the major barrier for the company to apply knowledgement management and encourage the
sharing of knowledge.
Regardless the importance of knowledge sharing had been highlighted repeadtly, in the real world the majority
people remain relucatnt to accept the risk of sharing his/her own knowledge and experience even he/she can
equally acquire knowledge from colleagues.
How to connect the gap between ideal situation and ugly truth may be the uppermost challenge most of
knowledge management leader would encounter.
Whilst the importance of knowledge management had been preached in class of several times,
it's always remote from me to understand what's the direct impact of knowledge management and
One of the government-runned company back in Taiwan suprised me by its poor knowledge management -
The totally opposite answers was be given to me by telephone customer service and at desk inquiry - three
distinct answers from three people. This awaful situation confused the customer and deliever the wrong
information to the cusomter lead to the faulty decision.
Hence, as the customer unable to acquire the correct information desired from anywhere, the waste of time
and consumption of the money result to a unsatisfactory service which ended up to damage the company
image in long run.
As this is just a tip of the iceberg - and it's already have huge impact in customer service (poor knowledge
management, and insufficient training) the importance of the knowledge management could never be
June 01, 2010
Read an article talked about the team-based decision or leader-orientated decision - which would be more
appropriate for carrying out business decision.
Whilst most of time team can figure out a decision that above average of individuals; the chances are that
the decision leader would make is high above average and eventually need to compromise with other's opinions
and eventually go to the second best options.
The interviewee in the article is the CEO of one big manufacturing company - what he believed is that the leader
usually is more experienced and equipped for the issue and also has a more systematic thought for the company.
Thus, whilst the team members can provide their personal point of view, the leader, according to the interviewee,
supposed to apply those knowledge being offered to perfect his/her decision but not mean to compromise or
trying to fullfil everyone.
After all, leader is the one who is full resoponsible for the whatever the decision team made.
Even in class, or in this year, we are being all told to share knowledge and appreciate the experience of
individuals; the major obstacles are that sometimes people just cannot see what others can see - and
lead to an endless discussion since they are not able to share what they see....
When we are trying to share the knowledge, and working as a team... the issue may be as easy as we imagine
in classroom... but further more complicated like the interviewee said in the article....
April 22, 2010
The discussions among our team members are constantly fierce (in a good way); we just generate so
many ideas and spend a huge amount of time on discussion and communication.
However, whilst devoting ourselves so much on the team project; we still encounter the problems of
information deficiency. This isn't about the lack of effeot, but is more caused by the different perception
of the information we need for the project. With the different approach toward the solutions, the information
collected would doubtlessly be distinct and cause the insufficient of the knowledge to achieve the task.
Thus, one lesson learnt here is that before allocating the tasks, the team should spend certain amount of
time on communication to ensure all members share the similar ideas therefore no one would research
on the irrelated information and reduce the effieiency of the team.
April 21, 2010
As the well known old saying "put yourself in others shoes" that reminds people don't perceive things with one's
personal point of view; there can be another side of this: don'e anticipate everyone has similar capability and
thought like yours. And even for those who possesses alike experience or education doesn't guarantee they
would have same mental model toward things.
In this case, when we are communicating or cooperating with people, we have to avoid of making too many
assumptions on them and expect you already have shared concepts on particular things. To quote what
professor said today "you can never over-communication"! Thus, as communication is the paramount factor
in KM, the people must aware the trap of "anticipation" as this may be one major cause of misconception among
people in communication.
Under the restrictions of resurces; most of time people need to take risk when making decision as the extra
cost for the last 5%(for instance) certainty may be tremendous to afford. Thus, the best thing one can do is
to gather as much information as one able to do with the best utilisation of the resources to carry out the
best answer under this finite resources.
However, even most of people do understand what mentioned above about "taking risk"; in knowledge sharing
system, some may still neglects the importance of this "uncertainty" and hinder the flow of knowledge within the
system. For one thing, the people may reluctant to share their ideas out of fear that whether they are correct or
not; with worry of giving out "wrong" information or knowledge to others may cause the loss of company,
people stop sharing their knowledge even they are 95% sure about it.
However, with this fear of making mistakes; the KM system is unlikely to operate effectively. Hence, whilst
people need to confirm the reliability of the knowledge they share; the uppermost task for the organisation
is to create a culture of "tolerate mistakes" within the company to ensure employees are willing to share their
ideas. An effective KM system can only provides its full benefit to the organisation under this kind of atmosphere.
The interesting thing is that: most of time even people do understand some principles about doing things
(eg. taking risk in decision making); they are very unlikely to apply these principles in other conditions
(eg. taking risk in knowledge sharing) even both of them are critical for the organisation. The question unfold
here to me is how should we know whether some prinicples of knowledge can (or can't) apply in another
situation? Maybe this is again coming back to the idea of "taking risk"...
April 18, 2010
In the knowledge sharing system, the uppermost thing is to ensure all the commitment from participants are gained.
Without the full devotion of people, there would be only fractions of knowledge would be instilled and hamper the
value of the existence of knowledge. Thus, like most of other principles of management, the very first thing is to
gain the commitment of people.And this may also be one of the most difficult barriers of KM.
April 11, 2010
As an old saying: "one must posseses triple of understanding to the knowledge before delivering it to others"
It's pretty much same to the knowledge sharing:
when one trying to deliver the knowledge to the others, all the weakness on one's understanding would be disclosure
relentlessly. There is no room for ambiguity as all the members are eager to absorb the knowledge he/she provides.
Thus, a well-framed knowledge management system reauires the dedication of all participants otherwise the
knowledge within the organisation would just be fractions.
To expand this topic, a manager must ensures all employees understnd the value of Knowledge management
wholeheartly prior to the implementation of KM, or the existence of KM system in the organisation would be futile.