features. Will the KM system make their work easier? Will it help
improve their job performance and contribute positively to their
appraisal? KM features, such as the functionality of the search
engine or the ability to collaborate in an online community, are
inadequate by themselves to generate support and commitment.
Change management postmortems of disappointing KM deploy-
ments often discover that the failure to clearly communicate
benefits is one of the major causes of nonadoption.
Level of Participation
Being a part of change is much more likely to lead to success
than being the object of change. Those who will use the KM sys-
tem should be part of its design. One of the best ways to do this is
to form a steering committee, representing all stakeholders, from
developers to users to managers, that will have, at the least, direct
input into the design of the system and, at the most, some gover-
nance or decision-making power. If necessary, perhaps because
executives and users might have different interests, several groups
can be formed. It is crucial that the input of all groups, especially
users, be incorporated into the project from the start.
These groups can also serve as a ready-made pilot population,
“eyes and ears” in the field to report back on how the system is or is
not being used and, if you do this well, a strong group of advocates
during deployment that can make the difference between adoption
and rejection.
The bottom line is that involving your stakeholders early on
will lead them to accept the forthcoming KM system as being done
withthem and forthem rather than tothem.
Hassle
At the core of knowledge management is the assumption that it
makes work and work life easier. Yet people may not accept this just
because they are told it is so. Initially, they’ll see more procedures,
246 LEADINGORGANIZATIONALLEARNING