Posted by prac on January 28, 2003 at 02:03:19:

In Reply to: Re: social embeddedness of knowledge posted by Joseph Murphy on January 27, 2003 at 10:05:43:

Further to this topic, some practical experience.

I currently fullfil the function of business broker in an independent capacity. A lot of excitement has resulted from participating organizations, and I could not figure out why, until yesterday. The ideas I have presented are nothing new, but I did make my commitment to them a 100 percent clear and have demonstrated this commitment, and requested others to do the same.

So why all the excitement? Seems it is simply because people love to network, and in essence, I merely broker business relationships between companies, who have previously not known about each other, thereby creating synergy without a threat to identity and common economic value creation.

Social networking is imperative to the formulation of knowledge with economic value. One cannot follow a closed-systems approach and expect to be successful. I think, this is one of the main reasons why KM in organizations have failed. Too many people insecure with their identity(ies)to open the windows to other organizations, and thus enable social networking. It is not purely eco-systemic, as even an eco-system could imply a closed system at a larger level of abstraction.

Since this particular event has kicked off, the excitement has been shared with other people, into society, and the result is continuously exciting. Some investors have expressed interest, without the word investing ever have been mentioned. I know they don't want to invest in the idea, but that they would rather want to be a part of the growing network and all the excitement.

Some people in this network may never meet, or it may take a long time before business scenarios would enable a meeting. Somehow, that does not matter, as long as their is a central point of contact with enough knowledge of all parties, to represent the interests of the parties, as well as the vision and objectives. In fact, I have noticed that participating organizatoins are relying on someone to keep the flame burning.

In the meantime the flame is being passed around to create excitement, without even having mentioned the issue of vision etc. The networked organization, in a virtual sense, is a very strong concept. One has to bring the practical bread-and-butter issues to the table and address them with sincerity, seriousness, commitment, and with knowledge.

Just thought I'd share this practical way of creating synergy, using KM as a guide. IM does fall within this context, but that is more in terms of networked communication and information sharing. One can easily adapt a particular piece of information to suit the ears of those who are receiving said information. It is a real-time customisation process, always ensuring the right information and/or knowledge reaches the right ears. This seems to work well, as it is not political, seeing as the focus is on the vision and objectives (value creation), and the self interest of those involved. In essence, it is a feasible compromise, which is managed, and which gives rise to tremendous excitement and commitment in people. No computer system supports this process, or probably could support this process of nature at work, although email, Facsimile, Word, and Excel documents do tend to move around the electronic infrastructure.

Regards,

Contrast this to the usual organizational process. Management will decide who should hold the flame of Olympia, regardless of the social and vision-related capability of this person. Eventually, the flame dies out, and it becomes another drag. Or not.:-)

---

Follow Ups:

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: