Difference between revisions of "Moving people's focus away from KM "products" to KM or KS processes"
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
For this new installment, Charles Dhewa and I have the pleasure to welcome Chase Palmeri from IFAD. A big thanks to her for doing this and to Charles for taking the video when he was in Rome! So here is Chase's question: | For this new installment, Charles Dhewa and I have the pleasure to welcome Chase Palmeri from IFAD. A big thanks to her for doing this and to Charles for taking the video when he was in Rome! So here is Chase's question: | ||
| − | How do we move people's focus away from KM "products" to KM/KS processes? You can view the short clip here: | + | How do we move people's focus away from KM "products" to KM/KS processes? You can view the short clip here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlrKmV3S6c |
| − | + | ||
| − | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlrKmV3S6c | + | |
After you have a look, please reply to this message. The discussion will run until Friday Sept 21 so please chime in! | After you have a look, please reply to this message. The discussion will run until Friday Sept 21 so please chime in! | ||
| Line 27: | Line 25: | ||
Thanks to all, | Thanks to all, | ||
Lucie, for Charles and Chase | Lucie, for Charles and Chase | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Discussion - Contributors | {{Discussion - Contributors | ||
| − | |contributed by=Jaap Pels, Ueli Scheuermeier, | + | |contributed by=Jaap Pels, Ueli Scheuermeier, Christina Merl, Tina Hetzel, |
}} | }} | ||
=== Summary === | === Summary === | ||
| Line 39: | Line 36: | ||
* Jaap Pels argues that the development sector is heavily focused on tangible outputs/deliverables/results in logframed a world and that is isn't in the interest of organisations/hierarchies/managers to change that. To make people/managers start to value the processes, the only way is to change the 'framing of the problem' and to change the metaphors and vocabulary used, through a face to face meeting far away from the office, preferably on the ground in the neighborhood of the ultimate beneficiaries of development cooperation and to make it interesting for them, suggests to discuss around some posts by Owen Barder, Ben Ramalingam and Tim Harford (see Resources) | * Jaap Pels argues that the development sector is heavily focused on tangible outputs/deliverables/results in logframed a world and that is isn't in the interest of organisations/hierarchies/managers to change that. To make people/managers start to value the processes, the only way is to change the 'framing of the problem' and to change the metaphors and vocabulary used, through a face to face meeting far away from the office, preferably on the ground in the neighborhood of the ultimate beneficiaries of development cooperation and to make it interesting for them, suggests to discuss around some posts by Owen Barder, Ben Ramalingam and Tim Harford (see Resources) | ||
| − | * Ueli Scheuermeier suggests to get the desk folks in HQ to discuss THEIR practices, THEIR challenges, THEIR headaches and ways to do things (ie. how to push proposals efficiently through the bureaucratic process, how to move money reliably and fast to where it is needed, how to explain problems with partners when they happen, how to engage and interact with private sector funders, how to deal with ICT-hiccups | + | * Ueli Scheuermeier suggests to get the desk folks in HQ to discuss THEIR practices, THEIR challenges, THEIR headaches and ways to do things (ie. how to push proposals efficiently through the bureaucratic process, how to move money reliably and fast to where it is needed, how to explain problems with partners when they happen, how to engage and interact with private sector funders, how to deal with ICT-hiccups, not what happens out there at the implementation front. Also to make sure it gets to be experienced by the intended actors that the exchange platform and the process there IS the "manual", not some document for reading up on |
| + | * Christina Merl added that this is exactly what they are doing (or trying to achieve) in the organisational context she works with, and she wonders why organisations are always so focused on KM theory and documentation rather than listening to their practitioners and change and improve their work processes accordingly | ||
| + | * Tina Hetzel | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 09:33, 14 September 2012
|
| |||||||||||
Contents
Original Message
From: Lucie Lamoureux, posted on 2012/09/10
Hi everyone,
You may recall that back in April, Nancy White started a discussion around a question posed via video by Gauri Salokhe from FAO. This was to kick off our New Discussion Series, where a KM4dev member poses a question and for two weeks we collect the responses, then ask the "asker" to react to the answers we received and then update the KM4dev wiki with this information.
For this new installment, Charles Dhewa and I have the pleasure to welcome Chase Palmeri from IFAD. A big thanks to her for doing this and to Charles for taking the video when he was in Rome! So here is Chase's question:
How do we move people's focus away from KM "products" to KM/KS processes? You can view the short clip here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlrKmV3S6c
After you have a look, please reply to this message. The discussion will run until Friday Sept 21 so please chime in!
Thanks to all, Lucie, for Charles and Chase
Contributors
All replies in full are available in the discussion page. Contributions received with thanks from:
Related Discussions
Summary
The question posed by Chase Palmeri from IFAD in a You Tube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlrKmV3S6c) related to the difficulty to get managers and other Headquarters-based people to move their focus away from KM as a product (i.e. reports, newsletters, etc.)., to KM as a process, which was easier to do with her field-based colleagues.
Some of the main points that came out of the discussion:
- Jaap Pels argues that the development sector is heavily focused on tangible outputs/deliverables/results in logframed a world and that is isn't in the interest of organisations/hierarchies/managers to change that. To make people/managers start to value the processes, the only way is to change the 'framing of the problem' and to change the metaphors and vocabulary used, through a face to face meeting far away from the office, preferably on the ground in the neighborhood of the ultimate beneficiaries of development cooperation and to make it interesting for them, suggests to discuss around some posts by Owen Barder, Ben Ramalingam and Tim Harford (see Resources)
- Ueli Scheuermeier suggests to get the desk folks in HQ to discuss THEIR practices, THEIR challenges, THEIR headaches and ways to do things (ie. how to push proposals efficiently through the bureaucratic process, how to move money reliably and fast to where it is needed, how to explain problems with partners when they happen, how to engage and interact with private sector funders, how to deal with ICT-hiccups, not what happens out there at the implementation front. Also to make sure it gets to be experienced by the intended actors that the exchange platform and the process there IS the "manual", not some document for reading up on
- Christina Merl added that this is exactly what they are doing (or trying to achieve) in the organisational context she works with, and she wonders why organisations are always so focused on KM theory and documentation rather than listening to their practitioners and change and improve their work processes accordingly
- Tina Hetzel
Detailed Description
[the meat of the topic – clearly, crisply communicated summary of the topic. Where relevant, a brief story – no more than 1-2 paragraphs - of how this topic has been turned into practice, ideally from the KM4Dev archives? If the example is long, separate into a separate subsection]
Examples in Application
[One or a few practical examples and references that illustrate the topic or show how it is done in practice]
Recommended Resources
- Complexity and development [presentation and podcast]: HeaderPeople working in development don't need to be told that it complicated, in the sense that there are lots of problems to try to solve. But there is growing interest in the idea that economic systems are complex, in a specific sense borrowed from physics and biology. Books by Eric Beinhocker and Tim Harford have popularised the idea that these processes may be at work in economics, and a new book of essayslooks at how complexity thinking might affect economic policy-making.
Earlier this year, the Kapuściński Lecture considered the implications of complexity thinking for development economics and development policy. I've now published an updated version as a narrated online presentation which lasts about 45 minutes. You can watch and listen online; listen to the presentation - for example in the gym - by downloading it from Development Drums or via iTunes; or you can download the transcript and slides.
- Owen Barder's blog: http://www.owen.org
- Ben Ramalingam's blog: http://aidontheedge.info
