between. Perhaps the answer lies with social capital theory as
espoused by Cohen and Prusak: knowledge is based on a trust econ-
omy, and therefore, digital connections simply cannot precede
trusted relationships.^8 Or perhaps we just don’t like the thought of
a computer sifting through our e-mail.
Behavior Management Doesn’t Necessarily
Translate into EngagementAlong with the people-centric view have come attempts to balance
more carefully the interdependence among people, process, and
technology. As knowledge management projects became more
encompassing of these three elements, the noise grew around moti-
vating the right behaviors. For example, “How can I get my people
to follow the new knowledge-sharing processes and procedures?”
Behavioral issues aren’t exclusive to knowledge sharing. Sooner
or later, everyone and anyone attempting to change employee behav-
iors will zero in on the performance management program because “if
it’s worth doing, it’s worth putting in the performance plan.” For this
reason, most of us carry a multitude of performance objectives, mea-
sures, and intentions—some of which are in conflict with each other.
However, “employees throughout a company make decisions about
what to pay attention to based on the perceptionof what their leaders
pay attention to,”^9 not necessarily what’s in their performance plan.
Objective setting is a key element to aligning and moving an
organization, and I don’t mean to imply that it shouldn’t have a
central role in the management process. In fact, at my company, we
238 LEADINGORGANIZATIONALLEARNING
Tip:Don’t get caught up worrying that your “experts” are going to
be bogged down with questions. Focus more on stimulating the
demand for questions by asking what work behavior would stimulate
a question. In general, people seem more comfortable providing
answers than they do risking appearing ignorant with their questions.