|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HUMAN LEARNING -
NATURAL DRIFT TO LOOSE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Entered
25/06/03
FINANCE
WORLD IN EUROPE SLOW TO ADOPT KM
Study Conclusions KM is still a new business discipline to most companies. 'There is a relative immaturity of KM in the financial services sector.' (p.27) Insurance companies lead banks regarding their levels of awareness of KM and the duration of the KM initiatives undertaken. 'This suggests that banks are still under-valuing their intellectual capital, the key resource of an organisation.' (p.25.) 90 % of respondents admit to having an inadequate understanding of KM's real potential and value. 'Financial institutions are either unaware and/or uncertain of the value of KM - despite the hype that surrounds it....To achieve a more realistic objective of what KM can deliver, and how it can best be leveraged within an organisation, it is clear more education is required.' (p.26) Those companies with lengthier KM experience show greater confidence in the value of KM. Thus it takes longer than other improvement initiatives to understand and see the organisational benefits accrued from KM initiatives. Previous investments in CRM technologies may lead to a blending of offerings with KM, that the author sees as being harmful. 'Organisations may see CRM technology as an easy way of implementing KM, either forgetting- or ignoring- that KM is a holistic process, its success more dependent on cultural than on technological change.' (p.29) IT companies' efforts over the past decade of creating the illusion that technology is the panacea to a company's problems can also be blamed for current, inappropriate KM initiatives. People saw 'people' as the most valuable resource for acquiring knowledge. This first-person, direct information primarily has been achieved through the communication vehicle of Communities of Practice. These are frequent discussion groups around an area of specialisation, often face-to-face. In insurance, 60 % of respondents prefer to do this rather than use a generic intranet or bulletin board. The importance of storing 'knowledge' was also examined. Respondents declared the following break-up of sources : within people 36%, on paper 26%, in central digital format 19% [Delphi study several years ago had the break-up at 42 : 26 ; 12 (also digital, non-shared format of 20%) respectively]. 76 % of respondents believe that digital central storing will be the 'most important way of storing information.' KM to date seems to have been driven from the front-line rather than from the executive level as seen by a high proportion of decentralised budgets. This concerns the author because she argues that KM must be executive-driven and executive-sponsored for real KM practices to be embedded in the organisation. Leaders must set the example in this new way of modern business practice. For real KM to happen, a culture improvement is needed that requires management buy-in and championing. A knowledge sharing culture is a new form of doing professional work, rarely seen in companies of any description. Leaders more than ever must not be just technical architects but social architects. Improved work practices like KM can only be achieved through new culture and technology initiatives. KM cannot be an 'add-on' feature of a company. It is a foundational feature or it ends up being a fad that is soon forgotten.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TOP
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
A
full page 
