Developing a Knowledge Management Strategy 127
Copyright © 2005, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
a working group comprised of its database managers to address issues of data
accuracy, replication transparency, and report validity.
- Establish a task force to improve the capture of tacit knowledge from CoP
designated experts. Each CoP has its own set of expert and tacit knowledge that
should be captured and put in the organization’s knowledge repositories. The
pervasive dilemma is that expert knowledge is the most difficult to obtain because
it is often ill-defined (knowledge holders do not know what they should be
contributing) and difficult to provide (experts are usually too busy to provide this
knowledge). Every CoP has its novices, apprentices, masters, and gurus. Each of
these experience levels has an expectation for the knowledge that is required to
perform work. An effective KM system should capture knowledge from the top of
the experience pyramid and pass that knowledge down and across the CoP.
Learning tools, such as the Virtual Schoolhouse, could provide training to knowl-
edge workers on how to determine what constitutes value-added knowledge. The
second important aspect of this recommendation is how to influence the collection
of this kind of subjective knowledge. It is important that this not be viewed as an
additional duty but as a routine and fundamental part of the job. Performance
metrics should include contributions to the knowledge base. Technical equipment
(e.g., electronic notes and journals) or personal whiteboards may make it easier to
contribute.
- Develop a plan for reducing restricted access to data and data repositories. An
effective KM system is open to all participants. Though we are all familiar with the
phrase “knowledge is power,” many organizations have cultures that treat knowl-
edge as political capital—something to be hoarded and shared only when it is
deemed advantageous. If KM is to flourish, that cultural value needs to change
from “having knowledge” to “sharing knowledge.” Therefore, AFMC should
review internally imposed firewalls and password protections to determine those
that are needed for security or sensitive data reasons. AFMC should also consider
using software that reduces the need for blanket restrictions.
- Create a metadata-tagging plan to improve AFMC’s ability to search and retrieve
stored knowledge. AFMC currently uses user profile metadata to improve ease
of access to Web-enabled search engines. However, user profiles are limited if the
desired data files are not also tagged. It is relatively easy to issue a policy that
requires all new data files to be appropriately marked. The real question is, “How
much of the legacy data can AFMC afford to retroactively tag?” This raises the
economic questions of return on investment. AFMC should create a plan that
provides the necessary guidelines for tagging data files.
- Require each AFMC CoP to develop a collaboration plan. Knowledge-based
activities related to innovation and responsiveness are highly collaborative. The
attention that AFMC pays to collaboration can be attributed to its role in leveraging
the expertise that is often distributed throughout the organization. Frequently, a
CoP—the epitome of a collaborative body—cuts across formal organizational
boundaries. A CoP often extends across departments and into other organizations,
including customers, allies, partners, and sometimes competitors. The range of
collaboration-enabling technology can present a daunting task to the people
responsible for selecting the best solution for their organizations. Additionally,
