Thursday, 24 March 2011
There's another discussion on Linked-In about "Stealth Knowledge Management". I must admit, I don't understand this "Stealth" approach.
It would be hard to imagine successfully introducing any other management discipline by stealth, so why KM? "Knowledge Management by stealth" makes no more sense to me than "Risk Management by stealth", "Safety management by stealth" or "Financial management by stealth". If KM is viewed with scepticism, then address the scepticism, don't hide from it.
I agree that there can be an early stage where KM activities have not yet reached management attention, and I have heard this referred to as Guerilla KM, but the point of Guerrilla activity is to make a big impact so that everyone sits up and takes notice. The use of stealth is only in preparing for the Big Bang. Think of the stealth bomber - it's stealthy only until something large explodes - then everyone knows about it.
I don't see the need to be apologetic about KM, or to avoid using the terminology. There are plenty of success cases of big value added, and the need to apply systematic management disciplines to maximise the value of your core assets (and knowledge is surely a core asset) is at the heart of all management theory.
Ladies and Gents, we believe in the value of Knowledge Management. We can show the huge value it can add. We stand by KM as the management discipline that drives continuous performance improvement, and that addresses the last untapped wealth of organisations - the wealth of knowledge. We are passionate about the topic.
Let's be proud of KM, not apologetic. Lets introduce KM with passion, not stealth. Let's stop hiding under the covers.
Posted by Nick Milton at 08:37