Next Generation Knowledge Management Has knowledge management delivered the goods? Can it? Howard Rosenbaum hrose

Next Generation Knowledge Management Has knowledge management delivered the goods? Can it? Howard Rosenbaum hrosenba@indiana.edu http://www.slis.indiana.edu/hrosenba/www/Pres/london_04/index.html

Has knowledge management delivered the goods? Can it? • Has KM delivered the goods? Can it? • KM as a computerization movement • • What is the promise of KM? • II. What does KM need? • • The context • • Social networks • • Collaborative KM technologies • III. Can next-generation KM deliver?

KM as a computerization movement What is a computerization movement (CM)? A social process that develops around a core ICT (or ICTs) KM systems are brought into organizational settings and integrated into social and work practices It involves organized and collective action and is rooted in a “socially constructed process of societal mobilization” (Iacono and Kling, 1998) It has an ideology, typically technological utopianism A strong belief that ICTs (KM systems) can cause positive social and organizational change

KM as a computerization movement Actors in a CM: researchers, vendors, consultants, professional groups, trade press, media, organizations, and sometimes the public Champions and activists develop and engage in a public discourse about the core ICT If successful, contested meanings and uses become stabilized Stability is important to the continued development of the CM Helps gather resources, recruit new members, convince organizations to try the technology

KM as a computerization movement Central to the public discourse about a CM is the process of framing Social meaning is constructed, disseminated, and stabilized through writing, debate, and discussion Within technological frames, socially constructed meanings are ascribed to specific technologies (Bijker 1997) Linking relevant social actors and the ways in which they understand a technology as having meaning and uses (Iacono and Kling, 1998)

KM as a computerization movement As the frame has developed, KM’s core ICTs have been interpretively flexible Once the frame has been accepted, for a time it fixes the meaning of the ICT This includes: Key problems the ICT addresses, acceptable problem solving strategies, a range of acceptable resolutions Theories that can be used to develop it, tacit knowledge and practices supporting implementation and uses, exemplary artifacts representing the ICT’s output

KM as a computerization movement KM’s technological frames have influenced people inside and outside of the CM Internal roles: recruit new members for the CM Mobilize similarly situated organizations to reject old cultural models and to identify with new ones External role: persuade a broader audience that KM systems are valuable, useful, and lead to a better social or organizational order Successful framing has singled out organizational problems that can be improved with KM systems and provided a clearer sense of how to address them

KM as a computerization movement Technological frames offer common sense notions about why ICT are the way they are and why there should be change Non-technical people gain deeper understandings about how KM systems are used in different situations Frames play a role in the organizational acceptance of KM’s ideology of transformation They justify high levels of investment in KM systems and set expectations about how systems can be used They are a bridge between abstract, macro-level social processes and micro-level social and work practices

KM as a computerization movement CMs have historical trajectories One can appear and just as quickly disappear One can appear, gain momentum and become successful in a path of increasing influence and impact One can appear, gain momentum, falter, become stagnant, and then revive Dr. Koenig will provide insight into KM’s trajectory The social impact of a CM can wax and wane over time What matters: participants’ organizational strength, judgments of near and far-term success, and existing opportunity structures (market forces)

KM as a computerization movement At different points in a CMs’s trajectory, frames open up new possibilities for action (and close others) The spread of these frames across many layers of public discourse mobilizes large-scale support and suggests specific lines of action within micro-social contexts such as organizations restructuring themselves in order to implement and effectively use internetworking technologies in their routine activities (Iacono and Kling, 1998; 2)

KM as a computerization movement CMs are often accompanied by computerization counter-movements who also frame the CM’s ICT These arise out of the collective action of activists who “oppose certain modes of computerization” that are seen as “bringing about an inappropriate social order” They challenge more localized changes thought to result from some component of a specific CM This can be seen in the professional and academic discourse about the benefits and costs of KM CCM Information Research Weblog http://www.free-conversant.com/irweblog/channel/knowledgemanagement

KM as a computerization movement Frames allow participants to sharpen support for or critique of the facet of the CM that is their focus It’s less important to verify truth claims about the relationship between the core ICT and social change It’s more important to selectively frame an interpretive schema so groups and organizations can understand and interpret the meaning of the ICT for their own contexts and practices As a consequence, frames and the discourse of which they are a part may misrepresent actual practice for long periods of time (Iacono and Kling, 1998)

KM as a computerization movement What is the promise of knowledge management? Better decision making and improved organizational performance Better services and products for customers Faster generation and application of ideas and innovations Increased richness and reach in communication Access to internal and external networks Access to competitor and market intelligence Reduced loss of knowledge due to staff turnover

II. What does KM need? At this point in its trajectory, KM’s technological frame is again contested The public and professional discourse is lively Academic researchers, vendors, practitioners, consultants, professional groups, trade press and media are supporting and attacking KM Many are calling for changes Next generation knowledge management! New practices and technologies Assessment of methods and metrics for measurement

II. What does KM need? Having mined insights from other disciplines, KM now seems to be discovering library and information science This is part of Dr. Koenig’s assertion that KM is in a third stage Since this is also my discipline, I will draw upon it for three interesting ideas that stand a chance to shape the discourse about next generation KM Context Social networks Collaborative technologies

II. What does KM need? The context An older meaning: the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and throw light on its meaning In general, a context is a set of interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs An environment that encompasses the circumstances, objects, or conditions within which one is surrounded A constellation of sociotechnical, institutional, political, economic, cultural, and organizational conditions in which people are enveloped

II. What does KM need? The context of knowledge creation or discovery, evaluation, and use is not adequately represented in KM systems What were the original conditions under which knowledge was created or discovered? What problem was it intended to address? What are the credentials of the person or group that created or discovered it? Who assessed it? How can KM systems adequately represent trust? Kelleher will address contextual issues, linking KM with other organizational functions

II. What does KM need? Social networks The concept is receiving attention in many disciplines It includes a set of people and the relationships and interactions among them Computer-supported social networks include the ICTs used by the people to maintain their relationships and interactions Sociotechnical interaction networks expand the concept to include much more of the social and organizational contexts in which people interact No matter which we choose, social networks are not adequately accounted for in KM systems

II. What does KM need? People in organizations are involved in social networks through which important knowledge is exchanged Some is not codified Legal liability, political sensitivity, thought to be trivial Social resources are important Sometimes people need to use contacts people in the networks have with people outside the network People don’t necessarily need access to experts Social or contextual expertise instead of factual expertise How can KM systems help with this?

II. What does KM need? Social networks of personal relationships are critical to successful knowledge sharing They grow and develop through a series of reciprocal favors and obligations Knowing the inventory of social knowledge and resources in the network is important This builds a pool of mutual knowledge and trusted relationships These networks are supported though regular interaction and conversation How can KM systems support this type of social network?

II. What does KM need? Social networks will receive serious attention throughout the day Stenmark will discuss the importance of everyday activities in KM O’Sullivan and Hughes will discuss people networks as a new model for KM Mowbray will provide insights into developing online communities for KM Griffiths will explain the role of community coaching as a novel approach to KM Keeble will discuss the challenge of organizational buy-in

II. What does KM need? Collaborative technologies Social software supporting group activities and interactions across national and cultural boundaries Augmenting socializing, networking, and work Two major goals of KM collaboration technology Enable participants to collaborate easily whether remote or co-located Be able to share their output effectively with the rest of the organization Morrison will discuss organizational collaboration for personal information management

II. What does KM need? Social software Blogs, RSS, Wikis Instant messaging Peer to peer network FOAF (friend of a friend): machine readable finding data Open Collaboration Services Initiative Ward will be discussing narrative and story as means to facilitate knowledge exchange Creighton will what is involved in managing a large-scale collaboration technology http://www.weblogsinc.com/common/images/0142605493758137.jpg

II. What does KM need? And of course, there will be a need for anti-social software http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/529.gif

III. Can next-generation KM deliver? KM is a computerization movement in a stage where the meaning and uses of its core technologies are in flux You are engaging in the public discourse that will stabilize its meanings and uses, shaping its future There is a growing recognition that KM is a collaborative activity Abell will be discussing this shortly It depends on the creation of shared context between the participants KM has to align itself with the ways in which people work

III. Can next-generation KM deliver? Next generation KM may be developed from the bottom-up A decentralized grass-roots movement making heavy use of social software People can share knowledge in person-to-person (or small group), just-in-time interactions They can do this in the context of solving specific business problems The key may being able to find the right person with the right knowledge at the right time Know-who over know-how

III. Can next-generation KM deliver? Next generation KM will rely more heavily on tools for personal content and knowledge management Tools for the capture, organization, recall and dissemination of documents, messages and other personal knowledge Done in an intuitive, transparent, automatic, personally customizable and simple manner Blogs, RSS, knowledge mining tools People develop self-managing knowledge communities Pollard, (2003) http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/images/TheFutureofKnowledge Management.doc

III. Can next-generation KM deliver? Has knowledge management delivered on its promise? Not yet! Can next generation KM deliver on its promise? YES! Depending on what we all do in the next several years

III. Context as information environment Next Generation Knowledge Management Has knowledge management delivered the goods? Can it? Howard Rosenbaum hrosenba@indiana.edu Social practices: concrete, situated, and often mundane activities in which we are engaged as we enter, work and play in, and exit a variety of social settings during the course of a day An organization can be seen an example of a setting within which specific sets of social practices are carried out by organizational members as they interact Social life is generated through social practices in ordinary contexts and is a skilled and ongoing production of knowledgeable actors http://www.slis.indiana.edu/hrosenba/www/Pres/london_04/index.html

Next Generation Knowledge Management Has knowledge management delivered the goods? Can it? Howard Rosenbaum hrose