A KM 2.0 system is more flexible and can constantly evolve

[German title: Ein WM 2.0-System ist flexibler und kann sich ständig entwickeln]

Mike Murphy
Knowledge Management Revitalized: KM in a Web 2.0 World
DM Direct, November 2007

Abstract: In the 1990s, the IT world was abuzz with the knowledge management (KM) revolution. In preparation, companies started hiring KM managers and purchasing expensive systems with the promise of making information flow easier and more efficiently. Over the years, however, the KM-related positions faded away, these systems remained underutilized, and people were left with a bitter taste in their mouth when KM entered the conversation.
So what happened? For one, there were so many different definitions of knowledge and of KM. Some people thought knowledge was what existed in the hard-copy documents lying around the office, so KM meant record or document management, organizing information in a company so it was easier to find. They simply automated existing information processes, taking paper files and documents and converting them into a digital form.
Others thought of it as a way to capture tacit knowledge from employees, which means it relied on employees to contribute information. This latter definition could be part of a cyclical problem – if your employees are not contributing to the knowledge base, then the knowledge base is not very effective and will not deliver on the promise of making information access and exchange easier.
It was also too rigid – older KM systems did not take into account that people were contributing content, so the content would naturally evolve as procedures and policies changed and employees moved roles. Without a flexible system, knowledge would become outdated quickly and rendered useless.

Read the full Article online.

©2007 Data Management Review and SourceMedia, Inc. All rights reserved

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *