In a previous post i talked about how useful a Wiki is within a project and how opening up a wiki and expecting team members to use it productively will probably not give you the best results.

Once you figured out which wiki tool to leverage ( if any ) and have rolled it out within your project the next big challenge is to promote its use.

Some considerations:

• Well, the biggest step to overcome is the inertia. Users seldom want to contribute when they see a completely blank space. Start putting up some of your own content and talk to a few of your team members to help build it into something substantial that you can then showcase to the rest of your team.
• Please keep in mind that being a corporate wiki every contribution made to it is tracked, there is no such thing as anonymity. Once you get over this hurdle you can leverage the fact that it is a great way to promote an individual as a knowledge creator.
• Don’t put too many rules and structures in place at the beginning, this is a sure way to derail the entire process. Allow your team the flexibility to grow the wiki the way they want it to. If you feel at any point that it is getting unmanageable you can always step in.
• The Wiki should be the first place your team looks for information, which means do not keep copies of this information sitting around in other places.
• Don’t expect an immediate return - A wiki takes time to grow.
• Educate your team - Take them through the entire process of creating an article on the wiki so they understand how it works. Do not make the mistake of assuming that just because everyone has seen Wikipedia they know how to use a wiki.
• Allow people to make mistakes and deviate from the “norm” - This is a creative process that will take some time to evolve, encourage a level of experimentation and allow your team to make mistakes. That is the only way they will learn how to use this effectively.
• Promote the wiki whenever you can

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

10 Tips of KM strategies as given by Cory Banks.

1. Manage the Change - Undertake any of these activities from a change management perspective, even IT related ones. Don’t just manage the change around the initiatives.
2. People before Technology - Spend money on travel and socialising before technology.
3. Behavioural Change - People have to be open to supporting new/different practices. They need to adapt to change. They need to see the value to them/others.
4. Organisational Culture - Depending on what the corporate and people culture is like will depend on whether KM efforts will survive. Examples could be that reward structures are personally focused and support a competitive environment so people may not be inclined to share.
5. Strategic Alignment - Activities need to support the direction and priorities of the organisation. This also assists in getting things approved/endorsed.
6. KM in the wild - Find out where knowledge creation and sharing is already happening in the organisation and study it. Learn why it has been successful (don’t just copy it) to help design other activities.
7. Technology is an enabler - Design the process/system and then look for technologies that enable this, e.g. Don’t install a wiki and then look for what you can use it for. Work out what you want to do and then see what tools are suitable to support it.
8. Adopt KM Principles - Don’t introduce separate KM processes. Modify your business processes to adopt KM principles.
9. Don’t stop at the first solution - Consider different options, methods, frameworks and see what works. Experiment.
10. Motivation - It’s not necessarily about reward and recognition. You need to find out how to motivate people to play the game.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I came a cross a few interesting articles that i though might be of value to some of you out there… The first one is about “Asymmetry of Knowledge Spillovers Between MNCs and Host Country Firms” from INSEAD and the second on “Why commercial Wiki’s don’t work” from the CNN money website.

Asymmetry of Knowledge Spillovers Between MNCs and Host Country Firms

“Multinational companies (MNCs) invest abroad for many reasons, but invariably the quest for knowledge and information will be a part of the mix. In this paper, shortly to be published in the Journal of International Business Studies, Jasjit Singh, Assistant Professor of Strategy at INSEAD, uses patent citations from 30 countries to explore whether the flow of knowledge between a MNC and host country is one-sided, or if everybody wins.

Global economic growth is highly dependent on the diffusion of knowledge around the world, but it rarely comes in a form that can be easily transferred, such as a blueprint or an engineering diagram. Practical skills such as management, distribution and marketing know-how are just as important to growth.

To gain these tacit skills, many countries focus on attracting foreign direct investment, developing incentives intended to encourage multinational companies to establish subsidiaries and work with local companies. But while these local subsidiaries can be a significant source of knowledge for the host country, they also provide a very effective mechanism whereby the MNC can access host country technology. As a result, technologically advanced countries may fear that such subsidiaries gain significantly more than they contribute in terms of knowledge, and that foreign direct investment may come at a cost.”

Why commercial Wiki’s don’t work

“(Business 2.0 Magazine) — Nowadays, the all-powerful Web user, recently anointed as Time’s Person of the Year, is both creator and consumer of every last bit of content at some of the Web’s fastest-growing destinations. Witness the success of Flickr (the photo-sharing site), YouTube (the video-sharing site), Deli.cio.us (the bookmark-sharing site) and Wikipedia (the knowledge-sharing site).

This naturally has gotten a lot of large companies interested in the idea of outsourcing their content to the Web crowd, or “crowdsourcing.

At the beginning of February, for instance, Penguin Books - one of the biggest names in the global publishing industry - launched a month-long, publicity-soaked project that attempted to get Web surfers to create a novel. The idea seemed destined to belong in the Web 2.0 hall of fame (or shame), as the most audacious (or most arrogant) use of crowdsourcing ever.

And eighteen months ago, the L.A. Times started a Wiki to open up its editorial page content to user-editing. (Wiki software allows a lot of people to edit the same document simultaneously, as with Wikipedia’s encyclopedia entries). In January, Amazon (Charts) launched its “Amapedia” in a bid to create product pages that could one day replace, or at least enhance, Amazon’s product descriptions. Penguin opened up its Wiki novel at amillionpenguins.com in February.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

MS Wiki Vs Wiki
“Right, i’ve already put up two prior posts on the wiki functionality thats available on MOSS 2007 ( Microsoft Office Sharepoint Server 2007 ) , You can read them here and here.

Now while it’s a great thing that Microsoft have finally awoken to the wonder that is the wiki, an in-depth look at the functionality would give an average wiki user the shudders.

While it is true that MS Wiki ( thats what i’m going to call it going forward ) does have a few of the basic features that we’ve come to expect of any wiki, the features it doesn’t have really makes you wonder if this isn’t a 1.0 version that’s been launched on the unsuspecting public.”

Knowledge Management and Technology

“When i started this blog the underlying reason was that there was a huge disparity between what i’ve read about knowledge management and the way its actually implemented in most organizations.

If you ask any KM expert about whether there is a standard method of implementing KM chances are he/she would probably say there isn’t one. It entirely depends on what your goals are and how these processes are received by your audience. At the end of the day, that is what really matters. The greatest KM Framework would still flounder if there isn’t buy-in from the grass roots level.”

Choosing the RIGHT Technology

“This is a question that a lot of you might have battled with at some point in time and if i’m not mistaken continue to do so. Before we get into the “meat” of this post let me sum it up for you , there is NO right technology for KM.

While we all agree KM is more of a cultural initiative, there is no doubting that without a solid technology backbone chances are you’re heading down a dark road.

I’ve reviewed a large number of applications that claim to provide the perfect KM solution, and guess what? they don’t. No surprise there for those of you who’ve spent time trying to find an application that suites your needs. Please feel free to disagree with me, and if you’ve stumbled upon that “Perfect” KM tool do leave a comment. I’m sure the rest of my readers would love to get their hands on that information, as would I.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The Weekly KM Blog by Stan Garfield is another blog that i read rather frequently. It has a wealth of information , mostly in the form of external links.

Some of these include :

1. Top 10 most highly recommended books on knowledge management
2. The Laws of Simplicity
3. Seven Secrets for KM Success
4. Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management
5. Social Bookmarking as a Knowledge Management Strategy
6. Implementing a successful KM programme
7. Japan’s Most Admired Knowledge Enterprises
8. KM Books Wiki

And much, much more….

I happened to chance upon Stan’s Blog after he’d featured mine ( Thanks Stan!, though I’ve moved it from its original location ). Ever since then I’ve made it a point to check up on his blog now and then. A great way to find some information on KM that i hadn’t heard about.

As always, if you know of an interesting blog do leave a comment here.. I’m always interested in new sources of knowledge.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

When i started this blog the underlying reason was that there was a huge disparity between what i’ve read about knowledge management and the way its actually implemented in most organizations.

If you ask any KM expert about whether there is a standard method of implementing KM chances are he/she would probably say there isn’t one. It entirely depends on what your goals are and how these processes are received by your audience. At the end of the day, that is what really matters. The greatest KM Framework would still flounder if there isn’t buy-in from the grass roots level.

It has always been stated that Knowledge Management is not about technology. However from what i’ve seen in most companies (these are relatively large corporates which have their people spread all over the globe) technology seems to be the backbone of the KM initiative. Unless you have a platform that allows people to extract the information they want and allow them to contribute to the system, chances are your KM strategy will not work.

This is because the average employee in the organization is so focused on his job that anything above and beyond is considered an effort. Though, dont expect people to come running just because you have built a system. There has to be a benefit to the employee, this can either be in the form of making his job easier to do, or providing an incentive for him to contribute to the system.

There are exceptions however, the whole open source community is built on a knowledge management model. The initiatives here aren’t driven by incentives - and while there were skeptics, at the end of the day these have showed us that knowledge management can sustain itself in the long run.

I’ve tried to put down the basics of KM in the form of strategies that you might want to use to create an underlying framework to tackle an initiative like this. You can read those articles here.

The bottom line is, regardless of what technology you use, at the end of the day you need to get your people the right information at the right time, with as little effort as possible.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Right, I’ve already put up two prior posts on the wiki functionality that’s available on MOSS 2007 ( Microsoft Office Sharepoint Server 2007 ) , You can read them here and here.

Now while it’s a great thing that Microsoft have finally awoken to the wonder that is the wiki, an in-depth look at the functionality would give an average wiki user the shudders.

While it is true that MS Wiki ( that’s what I’m going to call it going forward ) does have a few of the basic features that we’ve come to expect of any wiki, the features it doesn’t have really makes you wonder if this isn’t a 1.0 version that’s been launched on the unsuspecting public.

Being a fan of mediawiki I’ve come to expect that all other wiki’s display the same high standards ( I’m pushing it here i know ) . But basic things like a categories function seem to be missing from the MS Wiki package. Which means that grouping the “articles” you create becomes a logistics nightmare. The only actual wiki feature that Microsoft have managed to incorporate into the product is a web based UI and an interlinking feature ( i don’t consider versioning a true innovation as its functionality derived off MOSS 2007 ).

So, to sum it up…….. What Microsoft seem to have done is create a web based front end for microsoft word, and slipped in a interlinking system and called it a wiki. Even with the versioning system this is probably the simplest and least effective wiki i have come across ( Please feel free to disagree with me if you’ve seen worse ). I truly hope they plan to move to a “2.0″ version quickly, ’cause i dont see people waiting till MOSS ‘09.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

My last post introduced you to Wiki’s in Sharepoint 2007 ( MOSS 2007 ). I have since had the time to explore this feature in greater detail, and to be honest was very impressed by what i discovered. I was a little apprehensive about the wiki feature for the simple reason that being part of the Sharepoint platform might have encouraged over-engineering. However aside for the rich text editor ( which makes the process of adding content that much easier ) the basic layout and functionality of the wiki hasn’t changed. So if you are a contributor on Wikipedia you needn’t worry.

The major benefit for corporates of having Wiki as a part of the new Sharepoint Portal is two-fold. The first obviously is that now corporates have the ability to tap into and facilitate the creation of information using tacit knowledge. The second is making use of Sharepoint features like security controls allows them to impose a greater level of control that doesn’t exist in wiki’s like Wikipedia ( a thought that scares them half to death i’m sure ).

So what does Sharepoint allow you to do with the wiki?

• Wiki pages can be created under any group or library , if for example you have a particularly interesting post on your Blog ( Another new feature of MOSS 2007 ) you could spin this off into a Wiki and have other people collaborate on it.
• Permissions can be set at a page level, which means you can restrict which pages other users have access to within the wiki structure ( something i haven’t heard off in most other wiki’s )
• You can also add Meta-data to your wiki pages, as with any other document library. So you can showcase pictures ( for eg ).
• You can also set e-mail alerts on your Wiki pages.

It also offers other features than we’ve come to expect from all Wiki’s :

• Interlinking / Creating new pages using double brackets ( [[ ]] ).
• History tracking of the document. The added advantage here is that being incorporated on the Sharepoint platform you can actually pull the persons contact information of the exchange server.
• Lastly, versioning and reverts of wiki pages.

If you are interested in the product i’d suggest downloading a free version and experimenting with it.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!