Comments for Organizational Knowledge Design http://jbordeaux.com with John Bordeaux Sun, 11 Dec 2011 02:00:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=7741 hourly 1 Comment on Avoiding the Hook by BT http://jbordeaux.com/avoiding-the-hook/comment-page-1/#comment-88588 BT Sun, 11 Dec 2011 02:00:37 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=599#comment-88588 Another issue with the standardized project brief format is it is based on the assumption a consistent situation being briefed. This may work for financial reviews, but for more complex discussions a standard slide deck is nothing more than a burden. I can't count the number of times I spend hours trying to figure out how to fit a message into a standard deck. Furthermore, from my perspective, a standard deck assumes limited value add from the presenter. Who wants to sit through a discussion where the presenter adds little value? The best approach is to provide clear objectives for the presentation, clearly identifying any critical discussion points, and leave it up to the presenter to execute. Another issue with the standardized project brief format is it is based on the assumption a consistent situation being briefed. This may work for financial reviews, but for more complex discussions a standard slide deck is nothing more than a burden. I can’t count the number of times I spend hours trying to figure out how to fit a message into a standard deck. Furthermore, from my perspective, a standard deck assumes limited value add from the presenter. Who wants to sit through a discussion where the presenter adds little value?

The best approach is to provide clear objectives for the presentation, clearly identifying any critical discussion points, and leave it up to the presenter to execute.

]]> Comment on The Day DoD KM Died by William (Mark) Jones http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/comment-page-1/#comment-83317 William (Mark) Jones Mon, 28 Nov 2011 06:26:05 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/#comment-83317 This was an enlightening article. While I appreciate and applaud the efforts of grass roots movements to make things better, there is a place for knowledge managers. I have been working as the KMO for Regional Command Southwest in Afghanistan. Since I have been here, I have heard a hundred competing definitions for knowledge management. I have also seen several distinct approaches to it. I view most of them as doomed to failure because they are not attempting to provide value added to the warfighter. Operationalizing knowledge management gives it relevance. I will provide an example. At RC (SW), I began by reading all of the documents which provided direction and Commander's intent. These included OPORDs, CONOPs, FRAGOs, etc. It was a long list and took a couple of weeks just to read. I also went to the various Battle Rhythm events to better understand how what was being discussed and in what forums. With that information, I was able to create a comprehensive evaluation of RC (SW)'s Battle Rhythm. The report highlighted discrepancies between our stated goals and our curent efforts. It was used by the Chief of Staff to help refocus the meetings toward our stated objectives. This is one example of many I could provide on the issue. Operationalized knowledge management can be a force for good within DoD. This was an enlightening article. While I appreciate and applaud the efforts of grass roots movements to make things better, there is a place for knowledge managers.

I have been working as the KMO for Regional Command Southwest in Afghanistan. Since I have been here, I have heard a hundred competing definitions for knowledge management. I have also seen several distinct approaches to it. I view most of them as doomed to failure because they are not attempting to provide value added to the warfighter.

Operationalizing knowledge management gives it relevance. I will provide an example. At RC (SW), I began by reading all of the documents which provided direction and Commander’s intent. These included OPORDs, CONOPs, FRAGOs, etc. It was a long list and took a couple of weeks just to read. I also went to the various Battle Rhythm events to better understand how what was being discussed and in what forums. With that information, I was able to create a comprehensive evaluation of RC (SW)’s Battle Rhythm. The report highlighted discrepancies between our stated goals and our curent efforts. It was used by the Chief of Staff to help refocus the meetings toward our stated objectives.

This is one example of many I could provide on the issue. Operationalized knowledge management can be a force for good within DoD.

]]> Comment on Summering from Behind by John Maloney http://jbordeaux.com/summering-from-behind/comment-page-1/#comment-67344 John Maloney Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:07:57 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=591#comment-67344 Hi - Ever notice when the govt declares 'war' on something it gets worse, MUCH worse? JFKs Harvard boneheads tried the ‘Strategic Hamlet Program’ that aided the death of 55K US soldiers in the Vietnam ‘war.’ LBJ declare 'War on Poverty' then at about 14%. Trillions wasted. It's now at >15%. Carter introduce the 'moral equivalent of war' for his energy crisis. People laughed as they hung vast strings of Xmas lights and put a lighted Santa on their roof. Nixon declared 'War on Drugs.' Today the narco-industrial complex is more prosperous than ever. So forth and so on. The law of unintended consequences bites big govt over and over and over again. Sanctimonious bureaucrats think they are smarter than everyone else, particular complex systems like civil societies, markets and economies. Govt actions have no consequences to govt. The latest farce is Solyndra, Obama as a VCs, wasted $585M. $10M went for Feng shui at their new plant in Freemont. No one should pay a ‘fair share’ until vast swaths of obese central govt are retired forever. Meanwhile, the whole deal sucks. Time to start over. -j Hi – Ever notice when the govt declares ‘war’ on something it gets worse, MUCH worse? JFKs Harvard boneheads tried the ‘Strategic Hamlet Program’ that aided the death of 55K US soldiers in the Vietnam ‘war.’ LBJ declare ‘War on Poverty’ then at about 14%. Trillions wasted. It’s now at >15%. Carter introduce the ‘moral equivalent of war’ for his energy crisis. People laughed as they hung vast strings of Xmas lights and put a lighted Santa on their roof. Nixon declared ‘War on Drugs.’ Today the narco-industrial complex is more prosperous than ever. So forth and so on. The law of unintended consequences bites big govt over and over and over again. Sanctimonious bureaucrats think they are smarter than everyone else, particular complex systems like civil societies, markets and economies. Govt actions have no consequences to govt. The latest farce is Solyndra, Obama as a VCs, wasted $585M. $10M went for Feng shui at their new plant in Freemont. No one should pay a ‘fair share’ until vast swaths of obese central govt are retired forever. Meanwhile, the whole deal sucks. Time to start over. -j

]]> Comment on The Day DoD KM Died by PaL http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/comment-page-1/#comment-61587 PaL Sun, 21 Aug 2011 21:18:27 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/#comment-61587 Within our AF organization, the AFKN Community of Practice (CoP) was a VERY important tool for interacting with our global counterparts. As the focus of our CoP was collaboration on training issues and a location to share resources, the 'death' was a significant blow to the collective effort of our programs. As with MANY other support programs and communities in the DOD (AF particularly), too often the individuals making decisions have only 'academic' experience or these are ‘grey beards’ with outdated concepts and ineffective methods of application to our modern organizations. The Air Force’s Training community has for a long time lacked tools for sharing best practices, knowledge and experience. It has been my experience and impression over 20 years in the AFS that either the ‘collective’ AF community undervalues the need for a robust and experienced Training Management community or the AFS has lacked the leadership to implement policies, clear guidance and the tools needed within the community for effectively management. In light of this, for those of us actively involved in various AF Training CoPs, the grassroots CoP model allowed professional at the MAJCOM, Wing, Unit and work center levels a tool for cross-organizational/hierarchy collaboration, communication and sharing. My analogy of AFKN is that of being within a University Library, free to share tools, collaborate together as well as passing along best practice ideas, without the need to interact or depend on the Librarian’s in charge. The cancellation of AFKN felt as though the Librarian’s discovered they had lost control of the conversation and rush to turn the library light off. Those of us that understood the potentials of this in our professional communities, we still know the answers are out there, however, now it’s nearly impossible to find those answers in the dark… thus, control of the conversation has been restored. I recall my previous O-6 Commander once told me, ‘the military is really just a friendly dictatorship, and not always so friendly’. Within our AF organization, the AFKN Community of Practice (CoP) was a VERY important tool for interacting with our global counterparts. As the focus of our CoP was collaboration on training issues and a location to share resources, the ‘death’ was a significant blow to the collective effort of our programs. As with MANY other support programs and communities in the DOD (AF particularly), too often the individuals making decisions have only ‘academic’ experience or these are ‘grey beards’ with outdated concepts and ineffective methods of application to our modern organizations. The Air Force’s Training community has for a long time lacked tools for sharing best practices, knowledge and experience. It has been my experience and impression over 20 years in the AFS that either the ‘collective’ AF community undervalues the need for a robust and experienced Training Management community or the AFS has lacked the leadership to implement policies, clear guidance and the tools needed within the community for effectively management. In light of this, for those of us actively involved in various AF Training CoPs, the grassroots CoP model allowed professional at the MAJCOM, Wing, Unit and work center levels a tool for cross-organizational/hierarchy collaboration, communication and sharing. My analogy of AFKN is that of being within a University Library, free to share tools, collaborate together as well as passing along best practice ideas, without the need to interact or depend on the Librarian’s in charge. The cancellation of AFKN felt as though the Librarian’s discovered they had lost control of the conversation and rush to turn the library light off. Those of us that understood the potentials of this in our professional communities, we still know the answers are out there, however, now it’s nearly impossible to find those answers in the dark… thus, control of the conversation has been restored. I recall my previous O-6 Commander once told me, ‘the military is really just a friendly dictatorship, and not always so friendly’.

]]> Comment on Job-Killing Processes by Mireille Jansma http://jbordeaux.com/job-killing-processes/comment-page-1/#comment-52047 Mireille Jansma Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:20:53 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=577#comment-52047 Hello John, I recently stumbled across this Edge conversation with Gary Klein: http://edge.org/memberbio/gary_klein (video on the right). Perhaps you know it - if not: it seems quite pertinent to the issue you raise in your post. Hello John, I recently stumbled across this Edge conversation with Gary Klein: http://edge.org/memberbio/gary_klein (video on the right). Perhaps you know it – if not: it seems quite pertinent to the issue you raise in your post.

]]> Comment on These are not the requirements you are looking for… by Most awesome revelations in Working Smarter Daily for June 2011 http://jbordeaux.com/these-are-not-the-requirements-you-are-looking-for/comment-page-1/#comment-50228 Most awesome revelations in Working Smarter Daily for June 2011 Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:14:55 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=584#comment-50228 [...] These are not the requirements you are looking for…- Ed Bourdeaux, June 10, 2011 [...] [...] These are not the requirements you are looking for…- Ed Bourdeaux, June 10, 2011 [...]

]]> Comment on These are not the requirements you are looking for… by John Maloney http://jbordeaux.com/these-are-not-the-requirements-you-are-looking-for/comment-page-1/#comment-46680 John Maloney Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:31:58 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=584#comment-46680 Hi - "The future is already here – it's just not evenly distributed." —William Gibson While your at it please retire the 'harvest' metaphor. Cultivate is much better, of course, since it involves the whole activity, not just the harvest. Thanks. Cheers, John Hi -

“The future is already here – it’s just not evenly distributed.” —William Gibson

While your at it please retire the ‘harvest’ metaphor. Cultivate is much better, of course, since it involves the whole activity, not just the harvest.

Thanks.

Cheers,

John

]]> Comment on Job-Killing Processes by Aleta Wilson http://jbordeaux.com/job-killing-processes/comment-page-1/#comment-44863 Aleta Wilson Mon, 16 May 2011 17:07:27 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=577#comment-44863 I have a fellowship at UMUC where I am required to take cybersecurity courses online. This experience is parallel to your discussion, because of the social interaction (or lack thereof). Online learning is cementing the idea that humans are social beings and electronic communication has its place, but "real" communication is best done F2F. There is a reason why successful tech firms have their staff in environments where they can constantly interact physically. It's more productive and creativity ocurs spontaneously. This would allow a person to share their 10% product without repercussions. I have a fellowship at UMUC where I am required to take cybersecurity courses online. This experience is parallel to your discussion, because of the social interaction (or lack thereof).

Online learning is cementing the idea that humans are social beings and electronic communication has its place, but “real” communication is best done F2F. There is a reason why successful tech firms have their staff in environments where they can constantly interact physically.

It’s more productive and creativity ocurs spontaneously. This would allow a person to share their 10% product without repercussions.

]]> Comment on The Day DoD KM Died by Shawn http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/comment-page-1/#comment-40859 Shawn Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:05:57 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/the-day-dod-km-died/#comment-40859 People will talk with each other to get the information they need regardless of channel or technology so the need should be focused on listening to what conversations are out there that support the military mission such as in "companycommand" rather than creating endless empty forums and forcing people to go there. People will talk with each other to get the information they need regardless of channel or technology so the need should be focused on listening to what conversations are out there that support the military mission such as in “companycommand” rather than creating endless empty forums and forcing people to go there.

]]> Comment on Job-Killing Processes by Troy Ruemping http://jbordeaux.com/job-killing-processes/comment-page-1/#comment-39760 Troy Ruemping Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:35:21 +0000 http://jbordeaux.com/?p=577#comment-39760 Great post, John. A microcosm of the phenomenon you're describing is the technique (often used by successful workers) of sharing interim deliverables early+often-- working according to the principle, "better to get feedback early on a quarter-baked product than to find out after the fact we were heading in the wrong direction from the get-go". I've noticed, however, that sticking to this discipline is tougher than it might seem on the surface. Sure, it's easy to share something when it's only 10% complete and ask for feedback. But the key is in the asking-- without relationships of deep trust (or the organizational norm that sharing things early is just "how we do things around here"), there is a serious risk that the 10%-finished product will be perceived as a pathetic attempt at a 100%-finished product. ("You brought me THIS? Keep working and come back when it's good!") Both in formalized, Agile-like environments as well as informal ones where constant feedback+adjustment is necessary, one of the keys to the truths you've described is strong social bonds between coworkers. And that, sigh, can be the toughest barrier to improving work processes. Great post, John.
A microcosm of the phenomenon you’re describing is the technique (often used by successful workers) of sharing interim deliverables early+often– working according to the principle, “better to get feedback early on a quarter-baked product than to find out after the fact we were heading in the wrong direction from the get-go”.
I’ve noticed, however, that sticking to this discipline is tougher than it might seem on the surface. Sure, it’s easy to share something when it’s only 10% complete and ask for feedback. But the key is in the asking– without relationships of deep trust (or the organizational norm that sharing things early is just “how we do things around here”), there is a serious risk that the 10%-finished product will be perceived as a pathetic attempt at a 100%-finished product. (“You brought me THIS? Keep working and come back when it’s good!”)
Both in formalized, Agile-like environments as well as informal ones where constant feedback+adjustment is necessary, one of the keys to the truths you’ve described is strong social bonds between coworkers. And that, sigh, can be the toughest barrier to improving work processes.

]]>