Posted by Martyn R Jones on March 17, 2000 at 18:39:37:

Hello Brint Folk,

It’s Spain and it’s almost spring. I’m looking forward to traveling up country this weekend, to maybe Alicante, Denia or Java. Anyway, here’s a thought for the weekend – and as I am Cordoba, and into the “Frim Fram sauce”, as Sr. Reilly would say, here we have some more questions and very few answers:

My partner has the digital EB CD for the week so I have run out of useful and reliable historical references but …

Let’s, for the sake of argument, say that the introduction of formalized Knowledge Management in certain organizations is a reality. But why is it a reality and why does it appear to be so contradictory in certain aspects?

In terms of knowledge sharing how does the term “every one according to their needs and every one according to their abilities” accord with the way that capital driven companies have worked in the past? Are we seeing a real revolution in the appreciation of the possibly “innovative” worker? And a better understanding of the needs of workers who need better information and knowledge to do what they feel they need to do?

Knowledge Management in a large democratic and frequently matriarchal organization might accentuate the value of that company, take HP as an example. But might KM be used and knowledge workers potentially abused in other contexts where corporate values are not so clear and competitive advantage is not so much gained from the work of colleagues, their supported risk taking and their sharing of know-how as through the transfusion of knowledge and the reduction of risk associated with the current reality that some (groups of) people are almost indispensable?

For me, my current view is that KM in some organizations appears to be a question of bluff and subterfuge – I maybe wrong I hope I am. The liberated workers work for the benefit of the community, where people learn, people share and sometimes people are rewarded – with “medals” like Heroes of the KM Program, no doubt, but at the end of the day KM is used to ensure that the corporation is protected.

I find it really difficult to reconcile one other thing that maybe I could be enlightened on:

If Information is replacing capital then why am I still billing in dollars, pesetas, marks, francs and lira, and why don’t I invoice in terms of information, if really information has replaced capital? Is it because the “information currency” is still not recognized in my local supermarket?

I believe – maybe wrongly, as you can see in my use of dashes - that conscientious KM can make a real difference, when it is allied with respectable corporate values, strategies and the execution of those strategies. After all, competition is, was and will be when companies have to reduce, maintain or increase staff count through “commercial war” - this is grudgingly acceptable, but what about less scrupulous organizations who use KM for purely internal, manipulative and exploitive means? Can we control that use? Should we desire to control the use of KM in that context? What checks and balances can we put in place to ensure that KM is use to share and compete but not to grossly exploit the know-how and good faith of knowledge workers?

For the final questions and thoughts:

Some companies seem to want knowledgeable people to behave like fully fledged Marxists and for their colleagues to follow the example of an intellectual Kibbutz – so is the face of capitalism changing or are we seeing the story of Oscar Wilde come true, and we only have to go up to the attic to see what’s really going on here?

Sorry if I come across as too combative here, must be the music they put on the Classical FM stations in Spain – maybe some NY jazz would be better. But most of you – my virtual KM colleagues - will know my style (or lack of it) by now and hopefully ignore style in favor of the questions.

One last question, where is our good discussion group friend Mr. Reilly these days?

Thanks and best regards,

Martyn

p.s. I lied, one last question, does a “good” company have to have two hats: one ostensibly capitalist the other fundamentally social? Thoughts??

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: KM: Where is it leading us 2? Should not rely on spell checkers Martyn R Jones 21:51:55 03/17/00 (4)
  • Reliance Martyn R Jones 21:56:53 03/17/00 (3)
    • Re: Human Side of KM, Agur! Martyn R Jones 22:25:11 03/17/00 (2)
      • Re: Human Side of KM, Agur! Rahh! Mezei 13:47:38 03/18/00 (0)
      • KM & me Denham 01:23:52 03/18/00 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: