|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HUMAN LEARNING -
NATURAL DRIFT TO LOOSE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AUSTRALIAN
HR EXPERTS DECLARING - DEBRIEF - Is KM being perceived as mission critical in Australian organisations ? A growing number of companies are saying yes to this. 39 % of HR experts say their organisations are seeing it as critical, up from an estimated just a few percent some five years ago. Additionally a large percentage of respondents acknowledge the need for all the processes to be in place for gaining real value out of KM. But is KM subsequently being practised in Australian organisations ? Currently, only a small percentage of companies seem to have basic integrated KM processes in place. The researcher found only 11 % of companies might have some form of integrated process to translate KM into real value. Budget presence indicates a company's seriousness to a business process and only 23 % seem to have one for KM. End-user time allocation is very low, with only 12 % of companies adequately giving employees time to use and contribute to the KM process. And few have specific indicators to manage the KM process (11%).
KM is multi-dimensional... requiring multi-functional competencies... The researcher highlighted the need for proper integration of various parts to the KM process for maximum return on investment. Note how he segmented the process into the following : KM Strategies | KM Initiatives | KM Process | KM Documentation | KM Incentives | KM Measurement | KM Culture If it was only as simple as plugging in a new software program...but it certainly is not.( Even neat E-learning training solutions are not producing proper returns.) KM needs to be monitored and measured. Over-taxed end-users need to be rewarded for revealing their extra-intelligence to our organisations ! If it is not measured and rewarded in an enabling culture then do not expect sustained behavioural change in your employees. And who then has the skills and capacity for the soft-side of the KM process ? IT staff ? General Manager ? HR seems to have the key responsiblity in assisting critical culture change, the researcher exhorts. For KM to be institutionalised as a daily process amongst knowledge workers HR must be encouraged and equipped to take responsibility of KM initiatives. Only 8 % of companies in this survey direct the KM policy responsibility to HR. 36 % direct it to senior management and 19 % have cross-functional responsibility. 8 % have a KM manager as the key person responsible. The key message from this study is that KM is multi-dimensional and must be managed as such by a holistic KM manager for KM to produce real returns to organisations. Distinguished researchers like Davenport are skeptical that cross-functional teams can achieve this level of coordination. There continues to be a 'lack of ownership' when these teams are attempted. A single person who can champion but also work alongside staff to model the new behaviours may be what is needed. The communications skills amongst staff and between staff and computers must be greatly increased. HR/Training needs to therefore play a significant role in the KM process. There involvement must be greatly increased from the present relatively low levels. Finally...the end product of KM was well highlighted... Proper KM aims to improve existing core competencies and generate new core competencies, to systematically build your existing staff's talent to translate into improved key result areas. This is the real 'employee capital.' This is the refined definition of KM. All the other components are there to achieve this end. People-smart practitioners are the catalysts to good returns on KM. Will KM practices ever be optimised without these players ? Who are they in your organisation ? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TOP
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
