Results of AIWFC KM Assessment

1. Results of AIWFC KM Assessment Conducted by Dr. Jill Powell15 Aug 2012

2. FM 6-01.1 Knowledge Management Operations 16 July 2012

3. What Knowledge Management (KM) can do for AIWFC • Improve situational awareness throughout the organization. • Work with leadership to build a casual knowledge sharing environment and culture throughout the organization. • Train leaders on knowledge sharing and transfer techniques • Promote the use of online collaborative publishing throughout the organization. • Promote the use of communities of practice and professional forums.

4. What Knowledge Management (KM) can do for AIWFC • Integrate structured socialization into the fabric of our organization in order to build trust and increase communications. • Transform the traditional training process through the integration of social learning techniques. • Provide easy to use global online reach-forward and reach-back capabilities to access of real time knowledge and experience 24/7. • Eliminate organizational continuity breaks caused through loss or turn over of personnel.

5. What Knowledge Management (KM) can do for AIWFC • Identify new knowledge and experience of value to our organizational lessons learned section for further exploitation. • Shorten the learning curve for new organization personnel by providing immediate online access torelevant, knowledgeable and experienced subjectmatter experts and mentors. • Decrease the use of email internally throughout the organization when and where practical. • Work closely with our organizational IT section to ensure availability of knowledge transfer tools.

7. AIWFC Assessment The assessment identified gaps between what the organization is doing now and what it needs to do to be effective in the future. Assessment Methodology Interviews and observations

8. List of Gaps Identified by Assessment

9. Battle Rhythm • Fusion Center Mission • KM Plan/Policy/SOP • Knowledge Mapping • Calendar Management • Meeting Management • STRATCOM • EXSUMs • Dashboard • Lessons Learned • Most Cost Effective Method • Process Oversight

10. Gap 1: Fusion Center Mission Contributing Factors • Lack of leadership mission prevents both short term and long term goals and vision. • Lack of leadership mission prevents nesting in with Key MC CoE directives. • Lack of vision and goals makes it difficult to determine clear roles and responsibilities. Recommendations • Form a working group to conduct a Mission Analysis. • Include AWG as they are a great model of success. • Determine short term and long term mission and goals. • Build a Shared Understanding of AIWFCs Mission & Vision with Internal and External Stakeholders. • Assign personnel roles and responsibilities. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of all personnel have clear understand of short term and long term goals, vision and mission. • 100% of all personnel are assigned clear roles and responsibilities while remaining flexible and adaptable. Matrix

11. Gap 2: KM Plan/Policy/SOPs Contributing Factors • Lack of understanding of importance of KM plan, policy, and procedures. • Lack of existing SOPs. • Lack of Oversight. Recommendations • Form a working group to review KM plans, policies, and procedures. • Develop a KM plan. • Develop a standard for all SOPs. • Training on all SOPs. • Implement an oversight process. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of all personnel have clear understand of KM plan, policy, and procedures. • 90% of all critical SOPs are developed and implemented in the first six months. Matrix

12. Gap 3: Knowledge Mapping Contributing Factors • No clear understanding of how knowledge flows internally and externally. • No clear understanding of how knowledge resources are accessed from outside the organization. • Cross-pollination of ideas and knowledge among various departments is missing. • Weak knowledge flows between two or more people has created serious bottlenecks. • Weak knowledge sharing and collaboration hinder replication of best practices. Recommendations • Map out how knowledge flows both internally and externally. • Identify key gaps in the flow of knowledge. • Identify who needs the knowledge. • Use Cmap to design the best means for facilitating the flow of knowledge from those who have it to those who need it. Measures of Effectiveness • Eliminate 80% of knowledge flow gaps internally and externally. Matrix

13. Gap 4: Calendar Management Contributing Factors • There is no common guidance/policy/SOP on what calendars to use, or how to use calendars effectively. • Input into calendar is not consistently done. • All calendar entries do not fully answer the five-W’s who, what, where, when, and why. • Format of Calendar is still being worked. Recommendations • Identify and develop critical needed SOPs. • Use SharePoint to update all calendar events. Outlook calendar tools to send out meeting invites vs. sending out emails meeting invites. • Ensure all employees are trained on calendar management. • Provide oversight responsibility for these processes. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of all personnel have clear understand of calendar management. • All employees can locate and update Leave/TDY Calendar. • SO employees update calendar with current activities to include the five-W’s who, what, where, when, and why. Matrix

14. Gap 5: Meeting Management Contributing Factors • No established meeting battle rhythm (B2C2WG: Boards, Bureaus, Centers, Cells and Working Groups). • There are too many meetings that are not well-organized sometimes do not include the right attendees. • Meetings lack clear purpose and agenda. • Need for increase access to meeting room schedule. Recommendations • Develop staff battle rhythm for all AIWFC’s B2C2WG: Boards, Bureaus, Centers,Cells and Working Groups. • Implement P.A.L.: Purpose, Agenda, and Limit. • Use Outlook to send out meeting invites. • Appoint a scribe to each meeting. Publish notes on SharePoint to share with everyone. • Ensure all employees are trained on calendar management. • Establish a POC for meeting management. Measures of Effectiveness • 75% of all meetings have a stated purpose, agenda, and stay within 15minutes of their allotted time. • POC established for calendar management. Matrix

15. Gap 6: STRATCOM Contributing Factors • No current strategic STRATCOM Plan. • Goal not reached to be on higher headquarters radar screen. • AIWFC misunderstood functions and capabilities. • No STRATCOM plan for future needs. Recommendations • Develop a current strategic STRATCOM Plan. • Develop new STRATCOM efforts. • Analysis of future STRATCOM needs. • Measure effectiveness of STRATCOM efforts. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of personnel are engaged in STRATCOM efforts. • 90% of STRATCOM efforts are successful and are measured. • New STRATCOM initiatives are developed and used. Matrix

16. Gap 7: EXSUMs Contributing Factors • EXSUMs standard and SOP has not been developed. • EXSUMs are current sent via email to select individuals and not centrally saved and shared with everyone. Recommendations • EXSUMs should be saved to SharePoint to share with everyone. • Set an alert on EXSUMs SharePoint list that will send an alert automatically when a new EXSUM is added to the library. • EXSUMs should be read by everyone. • EXSUMS outside the organization should also be read and analyzed for potential cross organization collaboration. Measures of Effectiveness • All EXSUMs are posted to SharePoint. • Everyone sets an alert on the SharePoint EXSUM library. • Everyone reads all EXSUMs. • Analysis is done on outside organization EXSUMs how they interconnect. Matrix

17. Gap 8: Dashboard Contributing Factors • No Common Operating Picture (COP) for Commander Critical Information Requirements (CCIR). • No Needs analysis conducted to determine CCIR and help in timely decision making. • No way to deliver insights to all. • No way to monitor and track complexity of project status at a glance. Recommendations • Conduct a Needs Analysis to determine CCIR data. • Develop a Dashboard on SharePoint that has a user friendly interface. • Create an SOP that assigns roles and responsibilities for input and keeping data current. • Train all employees on the use of a Dashboard. Measures of Effectiveness • All employees are trained on Dashboard use. • 100% of all data is kept updated and relevant. • Dashboard helps in critical decision making. Matrix

18. Gap 9: Lessons Learned Contributing Factors • Lesson Learned are not being captured, codified, and saved to a central repository. • No After Action Reviews (AAR) process in place or any SOP. • Learn before, during, and after is not always occurring. Recommendations • Develop SOP and implement a process that requires AAR to capture Lessons Learned/Best Practices after all major projects. • Store all AARs on SharePoint site so everyone can view and gain situational awareness and be able to apply lessons learned. Post AARs to ALLIS. • Assign personnel to facilitate Rapid Adaption Net on Army Professional forum. • Send key personnel to CALL lesson Learned Course. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of all lessons learned are captured and saved to a central repository. • Develop and implement a AAR SOP. • 100% personnel are trained on capturing lessons learned. • All key personnel have attended CALL lesson learned course and conducted train the trainer. Matrix

19. Gap 10: Most Cost Effective Method Contributing Factors • Shortage of funds requires that we work more efficiently and effectively in allareas of our job. (M12-12 P residential initiative- Promoting Efficient Spending to Support Agency Operations May 11, 2012) • Lack of careful analysis to determine the need and the most cost effective and efficient method. • Lack of knowledge on what methods are available to use. • Lack of sharing best practices on what cost effective method is working. Recommendations • Analysis is done before all projects to determine the need and the cost associate with the project. More than one COA is considered before each project is started. COAs are developed with consideration of the need and the most cost effective method. • Share cost effective processes with others. • Measure cost. Keep track of cost savings. Develop a Matrix of processes and tools that can be used to reduce cost without losing efficiency or effectiveness. Measures of Effectiveness • That 100% of all projects have a careful analysis to determine the need and the most effective and efficient method. All projects track and measure cost and savings. Matrix

20. Gap 11: Process Oversight Contributing Factors • New mission and commands is contributing factor. • Shortage of time and availability of personnel is a major contributor to this gap. • Process responsibility not well defined with no SOPs. • Basic processes are not ingrained in the organizational culture. • Project tracking is not a priority and completion status is rarely enforced. • Lack of one stop Dashboard to quickly view and take action on missed deadlines. Recommendations • Develop SOPs that incorporates a level of oversight into all processes. • Assign a process oversight personnel to ensure processes are followed. • Create automated project tracking to provide real time status. • Develop a Dashboard component that provides ability to quickly view status and provide real time data feeds. Measures of Effectiveness • That 75% of all processes have an SOP. • That 90% of all processes have oversight and are found to be complete within the assigned timeframe. Matrix

21. Collaboration • Email Usage • Understanding of the Collaborative Tools • Collaborative Document Sharing • RFIs • Social Media • Continuity • Duplication of Effort & Redundancy • Workflows • Expert locator

22. Gap 12: Email Usage Contributing Factors • Personnel rely heavily on e-mail as a collaborative tool; the volume of e-mail traffic is difficult at best to manage. • Availability or awareness of technology and time, coupled with lack of training on technology and current culture surrounding e-mail, creates the environment for utilizing e-mail as the collaborative tool of choice. • E-mail with large attachments are sent causing mailboxes to fill up rapidly. • Directorates across the organization hold discussions and collaborate on documents via email with multiple addressees. Information is often forwarded to other individuals resulting in redundancy of emails. • Lack of incorporating email etiquette. Recommendations • Develop an SOP on effective use of email to reducing the volume of email that incorporates email etiquette. • Training on SharePoint as the primary means of communication. • Create workflows to route documents, approvals, and feedback Measures of Effectiveness • Cut email traffic by 30% while increasing effective collaboration using other methods. Matrix

23. Gap 13: Understanding of the Collaborative Tools Contributing Factors • Personnel lacks an understanding of some of the tools and processes available to work effectively and efficiently. • When they do have visibility they often do not know which tool or process to use and when and why it’s used. • Once a tool is identified its use is not evenly enforced by policy, directive, or SOPs. Recommendations • Conduct briefing on awareness on all existing and new tools. • Conduct training on all collaborative tools (SharePoint, Office tools, Cmap, ect..) • Develop policies, directives, and SOPs to support the tools use. • Oversight needs to be in place to ensure collaborative tools are being used. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of personnel complete awareness brief and training on KM tools. • 75% of all SOPs are developed and oversight is in place to ensure success. Matrix

24. Gap 14: Collaborative Document Sharing Contributing Factors • One way communication tools prevents collaboration. • Time wasted due to inability to discuss, analyze, collaborate, edit, and come to a consensus in real time. • Challenge to brain storm, plan, and strategize in real time. • Increase need for printed documents when there is no real time collaboration. • No SOP that provides tools and processes for collaborative document sharing. Recommendations • Save time and draw consensus quicker and easier using KM collaborative document sharing tools. • Provide capability to brain storm, plan, discuss, analyze, edit, get feedback, and strategize in real time with KM collaborative document sharing. • Harness imagination, creativity, and critical thinking using KM collaborative document sharing. • Reduce printed documents and compliance with Paper reduction act. • Develop SOP for collaborative document sharing. Measures of Effectiveness • 75% of projects save time/increase efficiency using collaborative document sharing. Matrix

25. Gap 15: RFIs Contributing Factors • RFI process is via email creating stove piping that lacks visibility to collaborate and Fuse. • Lack of central repository for RFI prevents the ability to capture, share, collaborate, fuse, collect best practice, and provide reach back. • Lack of effective and efficient customer service fails to meet needs in a timely and collaborative manner. • Lack of SOPs and oversight fails to guide and measure RFI process. Recommendations • Develop a SharePoint list that will allow RFIs to be visible, shared, and tracked, promoting collaboration and fusing. • Display SP list on Dashboard and configure SP list to collect best practice and provide reach back capability. • Develop SOP, provide training, and oversight to ensure successful RFI process. Measures of Effectiveness • 75% of all RFIs are addressed in a collaborative method that provides opportunity to fuse. • SOP is developed and oversight in place to ensure 100% employees are trained to provide high level of customer service. Matrix

26. Gap 16: Social Media Contributing Factors • Not a clear understanding of the power of social media both pros and cons. Tools include but limited to: Face book, Twitter, Flicker, You-Tube, and blogs. (Army Social Media Handbook Jan 2011). • Currently, little to no interaction with social media due to not understanding the importance of social media, believe that it takes too much time, OPSEC concerns, and not wanting to change to a new process of communication. • Lack of SOP and Oversight. Recommendations • Develop a Social Media strategy and SOP. • Training on Social media and OPSEC. • Establish and maintain Army Social Media presences. • Follow Checklist for Operations Security (Army Social Media Handbook Jan 2011). • Provide oversight to ensure successful Social Media success. Measures of Effectiveness • That 100% all personnel are trained on Social Media and OPSEC. • Personnel is designated to post content. • 50% increase in interaction with Social Media tools. Matrix

27. Gap 17: Duplication of Effort & Redundancy Contributing Factors • Lack of effective use of email was identified as a problem. Lack of use of collaborative tools and frequent use of "reply all" adds to user email overload and results in redundancy. • Stovepiping and hoarding of information. Many personnel are storing information on hard drive and not sharing with the right people at the right time. • Lack of data accessibility, search utilities, and meta tags prevents finding and locating information that currently exists. When information is not found it is often recreated causing time consuming duplication of effort. • Lack of cross-organizational collaboration using available KM tools causing both duplication of effort and redundancy. Recommendations • Reduce stovepiping and hoarding of information using SharePoint lists and working sites instead of email. Require meta tagging all documents for easy retrieval and promote collaboration and sharing. • Provide training on meta tagging and best practices for sharing and collaboration. Measures of Effectiveness • That 50% of email is reduced. • That 75% of all documents are meta tagged and uploaded to SharePoint. Matrix

28. Gap 18: Workflows Contributing Factors • No current workflows exists to reduce approval time, bottlenecks, and increase efficiency. • No visual modeling of current workflow process to help understand the current process and where redesign will provide the greatest improvement. • No automated workflow process for document lifecycle, writing and publishing, doctrine approval, that will saves time and reduces paper cost. • No workflow to perform administrative functions such as filling out OERs, that will save both time and reduce costs. Recommendations • Conduct workflow analysis to determine which processes can be improved by automation. • Develop automated workflows using SharePoint and SharePoint Designer. • Training on workflow process. Measures of Effectiveness • That 75% of all processes have been identified and workflow solutions have been planned. • That 50% of all workflows have been developed and implemented. Matrix

29. Gap 19: Expert Locator Contributing Factors • There are no processes to identify or link people to the right experts to solve a given problem. • No digital rolodex that is easily accessible across the command. • No expert locator tool is used to leverage organizational expertise. • Lack of ability to leverage reduce training cost and uncover best practices. Recommendations • Have all personnel fill out and update their profile on AKO people search. • Ensure all personnel use AKO people search before starting a project to leverage expertise within and outside their organization. Measures of Effectiveness • That 100% of all employees input and maintain their profile on AKO people search. • That all projects began by accessing and conducting an AKO people search. • That at least 50% of all projects leverage expertise is found on AKO people search. Matrix

30. Content Management • Data/Information Visibility • Version Control • Meta Tagging • Explicit Knowledge • Transcription • Continuity • Websites (NIPR & SIPR) • Acronym

31. Gap 20: Data/Information Visibility Contributing Factors • Lack of data/information visibility due to documents stored on users hard drive or stored on P drive in multi level folder structure. • Lack of data/information visibility causes reinventing the wheel and valuable time spent recreating data/information that already exists. • Content management SOPs are insufficient. • Lack of Training on processes and procedures. Recommendations • Data/Information must be saved in a central repository that allows visibility to all documents. SharePoint is the recommended system for sharing and collaborating. Ensure information/data is visible to the personnel who need it. • Version control must be in place to provide data/information that is the most current. • Avoid reinventing the wheel and recreating data/information that already exists by search SharePoint first. Measures of Effectiveness • That 75% of all data/information is stored on SharePoint and not on hard drive or on the P drive. Matrix

32. Gap 21: Version Control Contributing Factors • Time wasted locating latest version of a document, brief, or course content. • Reinventing the wheel occurs frequently when current version can’t be found. • Multiple copies are saved in different location increasing storage requirements and making it harder to determine the latest version. • No SOP for version control Recommendations • Use SharePoint to store files and turn on version control on all libraries. • Use Slide Libraries in SharePoint to store briefs and course content that allows individual slides to be updated and assigned. • Develop SOP for version control. Measures of Effectiveness • That 75% of all current versions can be located quickly. • Reduced need to reinvent the wheel. Matrix

33. Gap 22: Meta Tagging Contributing Factors • No understanding of the important benefits to meta tagging data/information. • Meta Tagging is currently not being applied to data/information. • Data/information still resides on P drive without being meta tagged • SharePoint Governance at G6 still being developed that address Meta tagging. Recommendations • Develop tagging system (naming conventions) and develop common taxonomy. • Training on Meta Tagging. • Deadline for moving content off the P drive and on to SharePoint. • Make P drive view only so content can’t be saved. Measures of Effectiveness • All personnel are trained on the importance of meta tagging. • That 75% of all data/information is off P drive on SharePoint and meta tagged. • Oversight is in place to insure meta tagging is occurring. Matrix

34. Gap 23: Explicit Knowledge Contributing Factors • Tacit knowledge that is in ones head is not being turned into explicit knowledge that is captured, codified, and disseminated. • No Capture plan or SOP exists. • No process for analyzing information turning it into knowledge. Recommendations • Develop Capture plan and SOP. • Determine the tacit knowledge that needs to be made explicit. Facilitate the use of explicit cognitive techniques, reflective experience, and socialization within the operational environment to analyze information. • Transfer tacit knowledge between individuals, teams, and units through collaboration. • Stored explicit knowledge making it easily and readily available to more people in the organizations that will contribute to integrating lessons learned. Measures of Effectiveness • Determine the tacit knowledge in the organization that needs to be explicit knowledge. • Measure gains in converting tacit knowledge that is made explicit. Matrix

35. Gap 24: Transcription Contributing Factors • Hours of recorded video and audio presentations and no easy way to extract relevant information. • Time consuming effort to re listen to presentations hand transcribe to get at the critical information. • Limited accessibility to data. • Not meeting 508 compliance. Recommendations • Conduct needs analysis to determine what content is contained in video and audio files and is critical to the mission. • Determine content that needs to be 508 compliant. • Implement the use of KM tools that provide transcription capabilities. Measures of Effectiveness • That key video and audio files have been transcribed. • Time savings is occurring when locating critical information in video and audio files. Matrix

36. Gap 25: Continuity Contributing Factors • No Regulation requires continuity when personnel leave their job. Instead knowledge is allowed to walk out the door. • Lack of continuity forces personnel to relearn the very same lessons and information that his predecessor spent time and resources to discovered. • Lack of time is sited as a reason to not do continuity. • Pockets of successful continuity and best practices exist but are but not shared. • Rarely an opportunity for a left-seat/right-seat ride. Recommendations • Develop an SOP requiring all personnel to build a continuity book. • Develop a template for easy entry using a Wiki, Cmap, or a plain word document. Provide a checklist of all items that would be helpful to share. • Start creating a continuity book as soon as you start a new position. • Provide oversight process for continuity.. • Create a digital continuity book that makes it easier to share with others. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of personnel have active continuity books. • Appoint a POC for oversight on continuity book. Matrix

37. Gap 26: Websites (NIPR & SIPR) Contributing Factors • Redundant data on multiple sites (SharePoint, AKO, APAN, CAC public, ect..) • Several Website that are in need of updating. • No needs analysis to determine the Website that are needed. • No SOP for website content. Recommendations • Conduct needs analysis to determine what sites are needed and the content that is critical. • Form a Working Group to keep web content current. • Develop SOP for website content updating. • Provide Oversight for editing process and updating. Measures of Effectiveness • That 75% of all web content has been updated. • Continuous needs analysis guides new content. Matrix

38. Gap 27: Acronym Contributing Factors • Too many Army Acronym that have different meanings cause confusion and misunderstanding. There are nearly 1,100 acronyms and approximately 2,000 operational terms in the Field Manual 1-02, the Army and Marine Corps’ manual of operational terms and graphics. • No standards for creating acronyms. • Often lose track of what is going on in meetings/briefings due to the large number acronyms. • New personnel often will not ask questions, even if they don’t understand a term or acronym, because that do not want to feel embarrassed. • Working with another service or a coalition military, often no one knows what the others are talking about. Each service has things that are service-specific. Having a confusing term can cause a problem. Recommendations • Reduce the number of acronyms used to facilitate understanding. • Clearly state all acronyms at the start of a meeting. • Change the culture to standardize on acronyms. Measures of Effectiveness • Reduction of acronyms use verbally in meetings and in written documentation. Matrix

39. Culture/People • Change • Knowledge Leaders • Measuring Individual and Organizational KM • KM Incentives • OERs • On boarding- Mentoring • Training-Cross Training

40. Gap 28: Change Contributing Factors • Users: Slow to except change. Everyone has a “work around” because of distrust of the “system‟ or lack of training. • Change is often difficult and can be negatively received (Old habits die hard). • Lack in a shift in culture and a fundamental re-organization of the way AIWFC operates. • Lack of executive sponsorship, internal feedback, and reward schemes. Recommendations • Implement “quick wins” to shift the mindset to a KM learning organization. • Incorporate diffusion of innovation into the KM process. • Monitor closely people affected by the introduction of change. Carefully monitor prevailing attitudes, beliefs, and practices. • Take steps to become a learning organizations that utilize acquired knowledge to become more effective. Measures of Effectiveness • Quick wins have a positive impact on change. Matrix

41. Gap 29: Knowledge Leaders Contributing Factors • No participation on AIWFC Army Professional forums. • Not enough time is a factor most often stated as a reason for nonparticipation in forums. • Lack of understanding of benefits from participation in Army Professional Forums: opportunity to maximize collaboration and productivity improvements across Army organizations, allow sharing lessons from training and operations, and enables those needing the information to learn and apply it in hours rather than months. Recommendations • Train personnel to effectively use and apply the AIWFC Army professional forums. • Assign a Knowledge leader to facilitate AIWFC Army Professional forum. Measures of Effectiveness • A Knowledge leader has been assigned to facilitate AIWFC Army Professional forum. • 10% increase in Metrics on AIWFC Army Professional forum. Matrix

42. Gap 30: Measuring Individual and Organizational KM Contributing Factors • Not measuring Individual or Organizational KM. • Lack of understanding of importance of measuring KM: provides a way to evaluate yourself and the organization and to benchmark the way you and your organization currently share, collaborate, capture knowledge, learn before-during-and-after, and network. • Limited ability to plan for future impact on individual and organizational KM. Recommendations • Implement a KM self and organization assessment tool and process for capturing and measuring KM. • Use visualization process to report benchmarks for current and future KM goals. Measures of Effectiveness • Individual and Organizational KM has a benchmark and KM goals that it is working towards. • All employees have awareness of both Individual and Organizational KM. • KM Individual and Organizational KM is visualized reported for both current and future KM goals. Matrix

43. Gap 31: KM Incentives Contributing Factors • Lack of knowledge sharing as core behaviors. • Lack of understanding the important benefits of knowledge sharing . • Lack of agreement across organization to focus on knowledge sharing. • Lack of KM incentives to change behaviors to become a learning organization. Recommendations • Awareness training on the important benefits of knowledge sharing. • Identify both formal and informal KM incentives. • Tie formal KM incentives to the performance review system that will provide a long-term framework that can become a permanent fabric of the organization. • KM performance objectives that are not only tied to subordinate performance review but are part of supervisor performance review. Measures of Effectiveness • KM performance objectives are include in both supervisor and subordinate performance reviews that lead to knowledge sharing as a core behavior. Matrix

44. Gap 32: OERs Contributing Factors • Missing or late OERs due to lack of leader direction and supervisor commitment. • Initial performance evaluations were not conducted. • Due to lack of initial evaluations personnel missed out on professional development opportunities, objective based awards, short and long term planning and goals. • Several awards are still pending or were not presented until after personnel had left AIWFC. Recommendations • Leader and supervisor commitment. • Make a requirement for supervisors to conduct initial evaluations with all personnel. • Track OERs to ensure no missing or late OERs occur. Measures of Effectiveness • That 100% leaders and supervisors are committed to timely OERs. • Require all leaders and supervisors to conduct initial evaluations with all personnel within the first two weeks of their arrival. Matrix

45. Gap 33: On boarding- Mentoring Contributing Factors • Lack of On boarding for new personnel. • Lack of Mentoring for new personnel. • Lack of Out boarding for departing personnel. • No process to capture and store tacit knowledge from incoming and departing personnel. Recommendations • Develop an On boarding program for new personnel to help reduce costs, hasten time to productivity, and improve retention. In addition, helps personnel develop their talents and improve their skills. • Develop a Mentoring program for new personnel that provides coaching, listening, advising, and relationship building. • Conduct Out processing with departing personnel to capture lessons learned and process improvement. • Develop and implement a plan to capture and store tacit knowledge from incoming and departing personnel. Measures of Effectiveness • 100% of all new personnel have been on boarded and have an assigned a mentor. Matrix

46. Gap 34: Training- Cross Training Contributing Factors • Lacking “Experiential Learning/Outcome based” model in IW/COIN training. • Lack of trained “Experiential Learning/Outcome based” Instructors (FM 350-70). • Lack of funding for training. • Lack of training on enabling technologies and process improvement. • Lack of assessment to measure effective long lasting training. • Single point of failure exists in part due to lack of cross training. Recommendations • All Instructors complete “Experiential Learning/Outcome based” training to become facilitators. • Curriculum is redesigned around “Experiential Learning/Outcome based” model. • Funding for IW/COIN training is secured and in the Palm cycle. • Train all personnel on enabling technology and process improvement. • Cross training to reduces single point of failure. • Measure Outcomes of training. Measures of Effectiveness • That 100% of all Instructors attend “Experiential Learning/Outcome based” training. All instructors are cross trained. Positive measure on training effectiveness. Matrix

47. Explicit Knowledge Change Most Cost Effective Method HIGH Fusion Center Mission Collaborative Document Sharing Process Oversight Lessons Learned EXSUMs Workflows Email Usage RFIs KM Plan/Policy/SOP Continuity Expert locator Social Media Dashboard Transcription Websites (NIPR/SIPR) Duplication of Effort & Redundancy STRATCOM Knowledge Leaders Impact Training-Cross Training Acronyms OERs Data/Information Visibility Measuring KM On boarding- Mentoring Meta Tagging Version Control KM Incentives Understanding Collaborative Tools Calendar / Meeting Management Knowledge Mapping Low Effort HIGH Low Legend Battle Rhythm Collaboration Content Management Culture/People

48. KM Timeline Change Most Cost Effective Model Fusion Center Mission Duplication of Effort & Redundancy Fusion Center Mission KMWorkgroup LTC TerryLTC Payne Meeting CalendarManagement MeetingManagement SharePoint Training KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup KM MOA Continuity P drive Migration to SharePoint Expert locator Sept. 10-14 Understanding Collaborative Tools Sept. 17-21 Dashboard Sept. 24-28 Workflows EXSUMs Data/Information Visibility Email Usage RFIs KM Workgroup KM Workgroup Version Control Oct. 8-12 Oct. 15-19 Oct.22-26 Oct. 1-5 KM Workgroup Knowledge Leadersc Social Media Measuring KM Training-Cross Training Explicit Knowledge Knowledge Mapping Meta Tagging On boarding- Mentoring KM Incentives Acronyms Lessons Learned OERs KM Plan/Policy/SOP Websites (NIPR/SIPR) Collaborative Document Sharing Process Oversight Transcription STRATCOM Effort HIGH Low Legend Battle Rhythm Collaboration Content Management Culture/People

49. KM Timeline-30 Days Change Process Oversight Most Cost Effective Method Version Control Duplication of Effort & Redundancy Email Usage Meta Tagging Fusion Center Mission LTC TerryLTC Payne Meeting ManageCalendar ManageMeeting SharePoint Training KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup Policy/SOP KMWorkgroup KM MOA Start P drive Migration Sept. 10-14 Pretest Sept. 17-21 EXSUMs Sept. 24-28 Websites(NIPR/SIPR) Collaborative Doc.Sharing Social Media Understanding Collaborative Tools KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup Measuring KM Dashboard Oct. 1-5 Ops Room Setup Oct. 8-12 Finish P drive Migration Oct. 15-19 KM Incentives Legend Battle Rhythm Collaboration Content Management Culture/People

50. KM Timeline- 60 Days Change Process Oversight Most Cost Effective Method Document Approval Task Tracking Project Tracking KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup Workflows Continuity KMWorkgroup Oct.22-26 Oct.29-Nov. 2 Nov . 5-Nov . 9 Smart Book template WhitePaper Newsletter IW Conference ALLIS Lessons Learned RapidAdaptation KMWorkgroup Training/Cross Training STRATCOM KMWorkgroup KMWorkgroup Expert Locator Collaboratewith CALL AKO Profile Nov .12-Nov. 16 Nov .12-Nov. 16 Nov .19-Nov. 23 Legend Battle Rhythm Collaboration Content Management Culture/People