Management corner4

Title of session: Where are we going with KM? What are some signs that things are going well?

Initiator(s): Jurgen Hagmann

Participants: Anna Curtner, Helen Gillman, Ethan Wong, Jaques Nadeau, Reza Salim, Johannes Schunter, Camillo Villa, Megan Zandstra, John Akude, Jurgen Hagmann, Denise Bealieu, Simone Staiger, Janique Francis, Willow Gerber, Renee Giroux

Main Points:

Over the past ten years, Jurgen has observed that KS, in some ways, is falling apart - ICT is creating an individualizion of knowledge. Decentralization of knowledge. Almost like universities, where, when a professor or research chair retires, all of that knowledge gets taken with them.

He is being asked to put together platforms of people who can share knowledge.

Can we head to a place where institutions share common services and pools knowledge?

Sharing knowledge is especially valuable now because people change jobs so often. The “Sense of Family” in workplaces less common. So outside networks are even more important.

Collaborative tools are great, but not quite there yet. Leaders need to encourage use of these.

CGIAR /CRP decentralization makes it more difficult to establish loyalty and institutional strategy within centers. There is an obvious generational shift – to resistance of administrative burden. And, in a way, it would be nice if administration could get out of their way so that researchers can get on with innovative/creative work.

The speed of learning is incredibly rapid among today’s youth. But the speed of institutions is less rapid!! They cannot keep up! All of this has created a power struggle.

Institutions are averse to risk. Understandably so. It is argued that there is plenty of risk going on in institutions, but it’s well hidden.

Many innovations will be taken away from the public sector, because the public sector is more averse to risk. Bringing it back to KM: We don’t lack knowledge on what makes an org effective. Good knowledge is inefficient - learning and democratic space is what is important. Belief in public service is important.

Strategy is important. Federation of Canadian Municipalities is an example of an organization that has introduced systems. Networks can be a huge asset here. They force people to share the knowledge that gets trapped on laptops. Information Management systems – the trick is getting people to put documents into it, so now they are working on having people to save work onto a saved space, before they are allowed to save.

Information sharing can be problematic, with so many people competing for funding.

Proactivity is important. We have to address issues up front. Communities can then report back.

How do we encourage risk and innovation, without fear of institutional failure? Leadership can help with this, providing space and allowances for innovation and failure. These issues could be worked into funding arrangements. Leaders must also make it OK to talk about failures.

Institutional culture sets the tone for risk and innovation.