Monitoring, Assessing KM
Chat is 12pm ET / 9am PT
Knowledge management is ill-defined but even more crucially ill-assessed. The inaccuracy and inadequacy of monitoring (1) approaches for KM has left behind a trail of tensions, heated debates, frustrations and disillusions. Differing perspectives on the value of KM and on ways to conduct monitoring have further entrenched these reactions.
How to reconcile expectations from managers / donors on the one hand, from teams in charge of monitoring knowledge management and clients / beneficiaries on the other hand? How to conjugate passion for and belief in knowledge-focused work with business realism and sound management practice?
What are approaches, methods, tools and metrics that seem to provide a useful perspective on monitoring the intangible assets that KM pretends to cherish (and/or manage)? What are promising trends and upcoming hot issues to turn monitoring of KM into a powerful practice to prove the value of knowledge management and to improve KM initiatives?
Join this Twitter chat to hear the buzz and share your perspective...
- What do you see as the biggest challenge in monitoring KM at the moment?
- Who to involve and who to convince when monitoring KM?
- What have been useful tools and approaches to monitor KM initiatives?
- Where is M&E of KM headed? What are the most promising trends (hot issues) on the horizon?
Summary blog post
Dear all,
I have written a summary post about this KMers' chat on my blog: http://km4meu.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/what-the-tweet-do-we-know-about-m...
Cheers,
Ewen
ASSESSING KM
If we analyze the commercial value of some corporations it becomes clear that there is much more than physical assets.
However, if we try to relate knowledge with the bottom line, we will find that the relation is not direct. Many factors exist between knowledge and financial results. The bottom line is the sum of partial financial results, that are generated by market results, financial management and production productivity. These three elements are result of the processes applied to each one of them and the processes that support them. For the quality+productivity of those processes knowledge plays a key role. So KM should not be evaluated by financial results, but by its impact in the quality+productivity of the processes.
So, the first task is to agree on a management framework that connects knowledge with results.
If this comment is useful, let me know
Chat transcript
Hello all,
While waiting for an even better transcript on this site, you can find the full chat transcript from the KMers' chat about 'Monitoring/assessing KM' on http://su.pr/2LaY7W.
I will also blog about this soon and keep you all posted.
And sorry again for the confusion about where to log on to the chat. This will not happen in future chats.
Cheers,
Kind regards,
Ewen Le Borgne / @ewenlb
tweeters monitoringcomments?
are tweeters monitoring these comments?
Sorry we were not. It's my
Sorry we were not. It's my fault I gave this page as one of the links to join the chat, but it wasn't correct. All apologies for this, although rest assured that not everything was said on this topic and we will have more chats about monitoring/assessing KM.
Tie to busiess process metrics
Using targeted KM (addressing knowledge flow that enable specific actions and decisions) performance can be tied to established business process metrics.
Is this chat in session?
Is this chat in session?
Test
Test
monitoring KM: challenge
stop talking impact, it's an illusion. Assess / monitor efficiency of what you do (i.e. cost/benefit and level of participation) and effectiveness (i.e. is whatever KM is done being used?)
Great topic for discussion
Hi,
Would like to participate in this chat session.
Thank you.
Claudia