You are not logged in. Use your Twitter account to sign in / sign up.
Do we need a Maturity Model for KM?
Date & time
Tuesday, May 11, 2010 - 17:00 UTC (other timezones)
Moderated by
Share
Tags
Chat Transcript
Chat Announcement
Sophisticated, established disciplines often develop "maturity models" as they themselves mature, e.g., Software Engineering Institute's - Capability Maturity Model (CMM)®
For KM, a number of maturity models were developed, possibly prematurely, in the 1999 - 2001 era. Some work has been done since then, but not one has emerged as a robust, de-facto standard. Is it about time that KM begins to demonstrate signs of maturity by having such tools and supporting KM Methodologies?
Let's chat about the merits of developing a robust maturity model for KM.
Agenda
Specifically, let's chat about some desirable maturity model characteristics, such as:
Q1: Should it be 'staged - sequential such as birth, child, teen, ...' or 'continuous - allows for loopbacks'? But, clearly the number of levels shouldn't be specified, but be flexible (traditional 4 - 6) and let's let the developers see how it unfolds?
Q2: Should the model be not only a more traditional diagnostic, assessment tool, but have prescriptive abilities as well (how you advance to the next maturity level)?
Q3: Should the model itself be flexible to allow for relevant application in a number of different organizational circumstances? If so, what are the common, almost generic components vs unique, industry-specific, if any?
Q4: Finally, if it is worthy of doing, what is a viable way forward?
Comments
Hi All,
It's a few years old now, but here's a link to the self-assessment (maturity model) which we published in "Learning to Fly". http://bit.ly/aiVFlF Hopefully it'll be food for thought here.
Henley Business School's KM Forum http://bit.ly/9Db6XE has just kicked off a project to look at Km competency and capability frameworks - should be interesting, and I'd be delighted to feed in anything that comes out of the chat here.
Cheers,
Chris
www.chriscollison.com
With a few alterations to that specific context it really helped not only in analyzing the situation but also creating some more insight in what KM means and can do. Thank you for that!
Measuring “maturity” such as in KM Metrics to get valid and reliable results should involving two variables, “Capability” as well as “Competency ”. Measuring Capabilities derived from “Activities” aspect. On the other side, measuring Competencies derived from “Processes” aspect. Process itself related directly to learning, but activity is associated with the efforts to get value added regardless or not so considering the learning process as predisposed factors. We observe, most of measuring maturity used as KM methodology dominated with efforts to measuring Capability only
We, at Mobee Knowledge have been developing KM metrics to measure Maturity covering Competency as well as Capability. Firstly, we use Process Classification Framework (PCF) from American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC) as the standard resources of Processes and Activities used to varieties of enterprise. The selected processes will be treated as variables to determine the detail in measuring Competency. The selected activities will be used in measuring Capability respectively. Here we use the standard range of measurement from Carnegie Mellon’s CMMI.
Because the main constraints to get validity and reliability located mostly in the domain of measuring Competency rather than Capability, therefore we developed two important operation concepts. The first is “Human System Biology (HSB)-based KM” ( http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/human-system-biology-hsbbased - HUMAN SYSTEM BIOLOGY (HSB)-BASED KM 2.0 MAP™ TEMPLATE AND ITS USAGE ). The second is HSB-based KM Map (http://mobeeknowledge.ning.com/forum/topics/webbased-knowledge-management or http://www.scribd.com/doc/24331515/WEB-BASED-KNOWLEDGE-MANAGEMENT-2-0-MAP - Mobee Knowledge KM 2.0 Map ). By using those two operation concepts in measuring Maturity we expect to getting more robust method
We named our resulting tool as Mobee Knowledge Capability Maturity Model™ (MKCMM™) as the hybrid of Carnegie Mellon’s CMMI™, APQC’s PCF and Mobee Knowledge’s HSB-based KM. Because it is not yet released formally and assuming it is still in “beta version”, you can take a glimpse look at page 17 of the “Document introduction to Indonesian workshop on Knowledge Management-based Balanced Scorecard” at http://www.scribd.com/doc/30824620/Document-introduction-to-Indonesian-w... . But, my apologize it is written in Bahasa Indonesia considering it is the intro stuff of a KM-based Balanced Scorecard workshop in Jakarta, Indonesia