KNOWLEDGE MGMT | FORUMS | EVENTS | HELP | PRESS ROOM | @BRINT


About BRINT | News About BRINT | Help & FAQs | Users Guide | Advertise Here |
Welcome to the World's No. 1 Resource for Business Technology Management and Knowledge Management
@Brint.com
SEARCH [HELP]

Knowledge Management Think Tank is now: BRINT Global Knowledge Network.

Re: Is KM pillars or umbrellas?


[ ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forums ] [ Discussion Index ]

Posted by Vaughn P. Fox on April 18, 2000 at 22:51:54:

In Reply to: Re: Is KM pillars or umbrellas? posted by Randall Garcia on April 11, 2000 at 12:34:24:

Randall,
Please consider the following response:
Discovery of critical information and Commander’s Critical Information Requirements (CCIR) are not necessarily one and the same. The military (at least the Army and Marine Corps) use CCIR as a tool for Commanders to identify knowledge he or she needs before he or she is willing to make decisions that achieve desired results. Commanders normally require knowledge about friendly forces, the threat and or the environment (physical and geopolitical) before and after they are willing to make decisions. Managing CCIR is a form of Knowledge Management (KM). Unfortunately it is my impression that most commanders do not recognize how to clearly articulate their needs (CCIR) in a manner that allows their battle staff to tailor information in a format that promotes knowledge by the commander. The inability to express their needs and lack of recognizing individual personalities generates friction. Instead of tailoring information in a format that promotes knowledge, Commanders are often overwhelmed by large volumes of information. This action is inefficient and costly…especially when decisions may influence actions and issues that involve life or death consequences.
Often key decisions influence actions and issues that effectively shape the battle space…meeting conditions that frame desired results for each stage or phase of the operation. In the military, conditions are analogous to goals in the civilian sector.
Enduring or “corporate” grooming is not TQL/TQM, process reengineering, or KM. There are many different interpretations of what is meant by the term KM, but show me one aspect of KM that does not fall under one of the four areas (pillars, mushrooms, umbrellas,,,your choice) listed below:
1. Professional Growth
2. Discovery of Critical Information
3. Intellectual Capital
4. Corporate Memory
-Professional growth requires leaders who are willing to foster teamwork that promotes a foundation of trust to groom additional leaders at all echelons of command…at all grade within the organizational structure.
-Discovery of critical information is recognition of critical needs and the processes used to satisfy those critical information needs. This action must consider organizational design and relationships within and external to the organization.
-Intellectual capital considers previous, present and future ability to learn and gain knowledge necessary to achieve desired results.
-Corporate memory gains knowledge from previous actions, issues, and people that form the organizational design/structure.
All four aspects of KM are intertwined. KM is not about technology…it is about people. Decisions made by people influence actions, issues and other people that achieve desired results.
The military has been performing KM for many years. Managing CCIR is a rudimentary form of KM. This action requires the military to manage information in a format that promotes knowledge needed to achieve the level of understanding decisionmakers require before and after they make key decisions that achieve desired results. Information management procedures are interesting, but recognition of critical information seems to be the key to success…but only if people recognize relationships and organizational design as they share quality information with those that need it, in a format they quickly understand. Thanks for the exchange of thoughts.

By the way, what are the three basic elements of command and control (C2)…according to your capstone document on C2? It is my understanding that “information” is one of the three key elements of C2. If this is accurate, how can the military effectively conduct command and control without a clear recognition of information needs and the processes used to satisfy those needs…taking into consideration command relationships and organization of the forces?? Please advise. Respectfully, Vaughn.



Follow Ups:



Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

Subject:

Message:

[ ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forums ] [ Discussion Index ]

Download Our Articles and Interviews
[Guru Interviews] [Real Time Enterprise Business Processes] [IT Users Motivation] [IT Users Commitment] [Commitment and Motivation] [Inquiring Organizations] [Social Influences] [Customer Relationship Management] [Supply Chain Management] [IT Adoption and Utilization] [Managing and Measuring Knowledge Assets] [The Real Competitive Advantage] [Why IT and KM Systems Fail] [Myths About Expertise Management] [How 'Best Practices' Become 'Worst Practices'] [Beyond Information Ecology to Knowledge Ecosystems] [Knowledge Exchanges and Social Networks] [Why Expert Systems Aren't Enough] [KM for E-Business Performance] [Does KM=IT? Not!] [Other Articles and Interviews]



Top of Page

BRINT: 'Your Survival Network for The Brave New World Of Business'tm
Recommended by Business Week, Fortune, Wall Street Journal, Fast Company,
Business 2.0, Computerworld, Information Week, CIO Magazine, KM World,
Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and hundreds of other worldwide publications.

About BRINT | News About BRINT | Help & FAQs | Users Guide | Advertise

Make BRINT your Start Page | | Link to BRINT | Submit Articles

Terms of Use | Privacy | © Copyright 1994-2007, BRINT Institute, New York, USA