Capping IT Off

Capping IT Off

Enterprise2.0: the new face of knowledge management?

Category : Social

Knowledge Management (KM) has a long history behind it, but with the increased use of technology in the late 20th century, has given it a more formalized picture. We all know that knowledge has always been classified into implicit and explicit, and that there are three major dimensions to KM: Process, Technology & People. All that theory is fine; but what is the end objective that any organization expects from a KM practice? IMO the bottom line is: does the organization (and its people) get the right information at the right time with minimum efforts? If they do, then it really shouldn’t matter the means by which they are able to get it. Unfortunately over years we have seen organizations trying to capture the so called “implicit” content, codify it, make it explicit and store it in large repositories which need access depending totally on search. This has led to an approach that has made KM sound similar to Content Management and companies in an attempt to achieve KM have ended up doing only content management. And the general feeling has been that KM is a failure, because content management will not get you the same results as with knowledge management. The focus with content management was too much on the side of the technology and IMHO it should be more on the lines of awareness, understanding and adoption of KM as a practice. Today, with the emergence of new technologies based on web2.0 (call them social media or enterprise2.0 or anything else), we are seeing the shift in the way content is captured, managed and accessed. As one of the simplest definitions go, Enterprise2.0 is the use of web2.0 technologies inside an enterprise. If you carefully note, enterprise2.0 has touched upon THAT aspect of KM which otherwise was a little ignored: the people dimension. With social media, the emphasis has been on the people-to-people connections, which in addition to the strong process framework and technology base, brings in that delta that was missing earlier. Enterprise2.0 has come across, more of a complete solution for KM. To me, Enterprise2.0 is the new face of Knowledge Management! I came across this set of presentations prepared by a group of enthusiasts at the site Besser2.0 (Better2.0) on the topic of “Enterprise 2.0 Knowledge Management”. They have done a great job and trust me, it’s a must see! Part3 of the set covers the thoughts I have expressed in my previous blog Social Media League and Part2 has thoughts on the same lines as the ones above. The important point to note here is that Enterprise2.0 is bringing back the good old Knowledge Management by focusing on facilitating the right information at the right time to the right people with minimum efforts and with no explicit requirement from the user to do anything in addition to his core role. I am more than certain, Enterprise2.0 will change the way people/organizations address KM and it will surely help in achieving the larger organizational objectives for which it has been setup. Enterprise2.0 is not just the new KM, but it is the real KM. P.S.: If you or your company wants to understand, plan and strategize in the enterprise2.0 arena, then I will be more than happy to share my thoughts around it. :-)

Nikhil Nulkar is a knowledge management consultant within Capgemini and is passionate about web2.0 and social media. Want to know what he is up to? Follow him on Twitter

About the author

N. Nulkar
N. Nulkar
5 Comments Leave a comment
Hi,
I don't fully agree that enterprise 2.0 is web 2.0 in the enterprise. But I do think a social computing environment is the coping mechanism for knowledge workers to be productive and connected in getting things done.
There are lots of differences, for one, web 2.0 doesn't have an aim, no-one is in charge, it just is...whereas the enterprise wants to maximise profits.
The enterprise needs big numbers to get the network effects.
Participation naturally happens in web 2.0, whereas in the enterprise we need to encourage and facilitate new ways of working, break habits and routines. Plus the friction with other departments who don't agree with web 2.0.
A hard one is ROI. This is easier in web 2.0-like group spaces eg. wiki, CoP, project, as you don't need many people, and the returns come quick. But an internal blogosphere/social network requires lots of people to work, and the returns are not known, it's more about what emerges.
Also how do we measure the ROI of my contributions beyond my team. If I end up spending half a day helping out people to benefit the org at large, senior management will be happy, but my boss won't as he wants me to spend time on my deliverables that he's responsible for.
So the org needs to understand that we need to change to a role-based networked org. We need to spend time self-organising and connecting (time away from direct task handing, but what we may be doing is learning/researching in order to make our task of better quality or lower cost or quicker turnaround)
Obviously we need transparency, which is a given in web 2.0.
Another obvious difference is that web 2.0 is egalitarian, whereas an enterprise is a hierarchy, which leads to our problem of one-way information flow down the chain, and decision making.
I've got more at this post
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/07/18/seven-ways-enterprise-20-differs-from-web-20/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/07/18/seven-ways-enterprise-20-differs-from-web-20/</a>
Here are some other related posts:
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/</a>
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/</a>
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/04/24/we-are-more-than-our-job-title-describes-so-lets-get-social/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/04/24/we-are-more-than-our-job-title-describes-so-lets-get-social/</a>
The idea of enterprise 2.0 which would see a complete end to the industrial era, would achieve KM's aims and more. It would become a new way of working that's embedded into the culture. And the self organisation would blend with hierarchy, workers more seen as partners than workers. This management 2.0 part of the demise or re-blending of the current power structure will be the power shift that is needed to make it happen...this could take over 10 years.
One other thing, what I like about social networks is not only about knowledge sharing, and finding this info at the right time...but it's the fact that when we do this in a network, we have shared context, and connect with people, this allows more chance to converse and re-frame info into a new context...what we get here is knowledge transfer and knowledge creation. Rather than KM 1.0 supplying knowledge in case it needs to be used on a rainy day, it's more created on demand.
Hi,
I don't fully agree that enterprise 2.0 is web 2.0 in the enterprise. But I do think a social computing environment is the coping mechanism for knowledge workers to be productive and connected in getting things done.
There are lots of differences, for one, web 2.0 doesn't have an aim, no-one is in charge, it just is...whereas the enterprise wants to maximise profits.
The enterprise needs big numbers to get the network effects.
Participation naturally happens in web 2.0, whereas in the enterprise we need to encourage and facilitate new ways of working, break habits and routines. Plus the friction with other departments who don't agree with web 2.0.
A hard one is ROI. This is easier in web 2.0-like group spaces eg. wiki, CoP, project, as you don't need many people, and the returns come quick. But an internal blogosphere/social network requires lots of people to work, and the returns are not known, it's more about what emerges.
Also how do we measure the ROI of my contributions beyond my team. If I end up spending half a day helping out people to benefit the org at large, senior management will be happy, but my boss won't as he wants me to spend time on my deliverables that he's responsible for.
So the org needs to understand that we need to change to a role-based networked org. We need to spend time self-organising and connecting (time away from direct task handing, but what we may be doing is learning/researching in order to make our task of better quality or lower cost or quicker turnaround)
Obviously we need transparency, which is a given in web 2.0.
Another obvious difference is that web 2.0 is egalitarian, whereas an enterprise is a hierarchy, which leads to our problem of one-way information flow down the chain, and decision making.
I've got more at this post
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/07/18/seven-ways-enterprise-20-differs-from-web-20/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/07/18/seven-ways-enterprise-20-differs-from-web-20/</a>
Here are some other related posts:
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/</a>
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/</a>
<a href="http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/04/24/we-are-more-than-our-job-title-describes-so-lets-get-social/" rel="nofollow">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/04/24/we-are-more-than-our-job-title-describes-so-lets-get-social/</a>
The idea of enterprise 2.0 which would see a complete end to the industrial era, would achieve KM's aims and more. It would become a new way of working that's embedded into the culture. And the self organisation would blend with hierarchy, workers more seen as partners than workers. This management 2.0 part of the demise or re-blending of the current power structure will be the power shift that is needed to make it happen...this could take over 10 years.
One other thing, what I like about social networks is not only about knowledge sharing, and finding this info at the right time...but it's the fact that when we do this in a network, we have shared context, and connect with people, this allows more chance to converse and re-frame info into a new context...what we get here is knowledge transfer and knowledge creation. Rather than KM 1.0 supplying knowledge in case it needs to be used on a rainy day, it's more created on demand.
Hi John,
Thanks for the detailed comment! Some very good points in there. I did have a quick read through your point of view. Some of the things you have mentioned are very true and that's precisely what I have tried to express in my post.
There are a couple more posts that I plan to write around Enterprise2.0 (and some of the points you have mentioned above) in the coming days and I hope to express my thoughts around it!
Thanks,
Nikhil
I agree with you John. It is difficult for comapnies with legacy systems, processes and mindsets trying to implement KM 2.0. The transparency becomes a threat for users. Any ideas where these could two meet. How easy is the transition? any good case studies?
I would just like to know more about Knowledge Management.

Leave a comment

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