I find that quite often when we say Knowledge Management, we actually mean Content Management or other aspects of explicit knowledge. That is a logical starting point for most of us, for historical reasons but also because it is the easier of the two knowledge dimensions to quantify and measure both progress and business impact.

But what about our tacit Knowledge Assets? This is the collective knowledge comprised by different personalities, experiences (past and present, personal and professional) and passions, that is the main intellectual capital for any knowledge worker organization. Are we leveraging tacit knowledge in a way that drives our business forward? And are we able to effectively combine and balance the needs and desires for tacit vs. explicit – including return on investment (ROI), cost of creation, harvesting and curation? Is tacit knowledge the secret sauce that can help us maximise investments made on the explicit side?

I believe that we can and should. But before designing a solution or planning the next tacit KM initiative, it may be worth spending some time thinking through your tacit knowledge needs, how existing tacit knowledge is shared, collaboration forums etc., because most likely there are several initiatives already existing (likely in pockets) that you can build on:

1. What constitutes tacit knowledge in your company and what is its value to your business?

2. How and where does tacit knowledge sharing happen today: Is it informal or formal knowledge sharing and are there ways we can standardise to drive synergies?

3. How can you capitalise on tacit knowledge and demonstrate clear business value?

What do we mean by Tacit Knowledge?

For the sake of simplicity, I am using a broad definition of Tacit Knowledge: “any skills, experiences and expertise that exists in our people’s heads”.

For a professional services organisation like my own or any knowledge worker organisation, this is core intellectual capital. It is important to create environments where people can share experiences and have conversations about common interests, central to innovation. The key is to support the tacit knowledge exchange in a way that makes the knowledge accessible for others at a later point in time, to capitalise on it at scale, without stifling creativity.

How and where does Tacit Knowledge sharing happen in your organisation?

Most of us subscribe to the thinking that diverse teams are more creative, innovative and productive, and we strive to foster collaborative environments that can enable those teams to achieve more, by leveraging both explicit and tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge sharing can take many forms–from experiences and expertise shared in meetings and projects, collaboration platforms (formal as well as informal ones), Communities of Practice, Expertise Location Services, to new hire buddy-systems and peer mentoring.

It’s a good idea to start by identifying any such formal and informal occurrences before making plans to extend or attempt to merge to a common platform. It is likely to find informal forums with more engagement than formal ones.

Once these tacit knowledge sharing pockets have been identified, it is worth looking at the success and user adoption of them, to understand why some are more popular or more effective than others. This is especially valuable when looking at KM solutions. It’s very easy to jump on the social collaboration bandwagon and think that a new collaboration platform will magically solve all problems and be immediately adopted. This is highly unlikely as the “Build it and they will come” approach rarely works, in KM, or elsewhere!

The main challenge then becomes how to standardise and align where collaboration, or other forms of tacit knowledge sharing happens, so that it can be harvested for re-use and/or become available for broader consumption. We need to be careful here, that the organisation’s need for reporting and measuring impact or value, does not take priority over usability and impacts adoption.

How can you measure the value of Tacit Knowledge?

We tend to assume that if we can’t measure it, it doesn’t exist, or has little value to the company. So how can we measure the monetary value of peer-to-peer interactions and capturing knowledge currently not documented? It may be valuable to consider at least these two aspects of “value” dimensions:

Activity metrics–designed to show and drive behavioural change and encourage or incentivise knowledge sharing and collaboration. Metrics can be very effective in driving behaviour, but we need to be careful to drive the right behaviour for the right reason, so that it doesn’t become a tick-box exercise.

Value metrics– with intent to monetary impact, which is always hard when trying to show $ value of intangible assets, like productivity or efficiency. It’s important to acknowledge this and consider indirect metrics (correlations) between knowledge sharing and business results.

In summary, tacit knowledge is as important, and sometimes more so, than explicit knowledge and you need to look at both when planning a KM initiative. Sharing and usage of tacit knowledge can be a differentiator for your business, as a foundation for innovation and collaboration, driving revenue, efficiencies and employee satisfaction. All of which can’t necessarily be directly translated into monetary value but are nonetheless contributing to business objectives.

As knowledge management professionals, it’s clear to you and me why we should invest in knowledge management initiatives. However, not everyone shares this understanding, especially at the executive level, so what can you do to gain buy-in from senior leaders along with the resources and support you need to be successful?

We’re enthusiastic about our KM initiatives because we know that they can improve the way people collaborate, innovate, and produce meaningful results at work. Executives often have the same objectives, but they may not see the connection between their priorities and what we’re calling “knowledge management.” It’s up to you to help them make this connection. Here are the top three ways to gain executive buy-in and foster a shared vision for your knowledge management initiatives.

1. Align Priorities

At EK, we approach knowledge management from five workstreams: People, Process, Content, Culture, and Technology. This holistic approach means that knowledge management isn’t just about fixing the intranet that no one uses because they can never find anything they’re looking for. Your proposed KM solution may certainly include intranet upgrades but typically consists of much more. For example, a KM initiative may also include the implementation of new knowledge sharing practices like bi-weekly presentations from experts or a KM leadership structure to ensure that your KM initiatives gain momentum over time.

Developing solutions that incorporate these five workstreams leads to longer lasting results. Similar to our physical health, if you treat an ailment myopically with medication, you are likely to have unforeseen side effects; however, if you take an approach that addresses your stress level, diet, and exercise, you are likely to see overall improvements in not only your problem area but in all areas of your mental and physical well-being.

It’s always important to be aware of what your key stakeholders care about and to address those priorities when communicating your plan. Your executives may care about having the brightest people, the best culture, the most cutting-edge technology, seamless collaboration between individuals and teams, and/or quality content that provides useful and engaging information to people inside and outside of the organization. Being able to speak to how a well-designed taxonomy, ontology, content strategy, community of practice, and/or governance structure can achieve those things will encourage them to see that what you’re proposing is not so different from what they are trying to achieve themselves.    

2. Create Value

It’s easy to talk abstractly about how the future of KM will change the way we work. Artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and robotics are all fascinating concepts to explore, but you have to walk before you run. Starting with the basic building blocks such as making information more findable and discoverable via a simplified and intuitive taxonomy and content structure creates a foundation that will allow you to invest in more sophisticated features like personalization and recommendation engines in the long run.

It’s important to make sure that your KM initiatives are focused on creating value for the people in your organization who need improved processes and reliable technology. Be able to articulate this value to executives in the context in which they operate: return on investment. If they invest in your KM initiatives, what will the organization gain and by when?

When presenting your KM initiative to executives and other stakeholders, try using a strategy canvas like the one below:

3. Show Results

Once you’ve communicated the business value that your KM initiatives will have, be able to back it up with results. We recommend an agile approach to our KM initiatives because you’re able to show incremental results within months of undergoing your initiatives, rather than years later. These results should be a balance between quantitative metrics such as the time it takes for people to find what they’re looking for as well as qualitative evidence such as anecdotes from employees regarding the significantly improved experience searching for internal information. Rather than implementing an entire program right away, start with a pilot so that you can create a success story for others to see and want to emulate.

Successful KM initiatives are easy to spot because they create palpable change in the way that people work and interact with one another. You’ll see less frustration because people are finding what they need more quickly. Team members will operate more collaboratively rather than in silos because they can easily connect with experts within the organization and are encouraged to so. You’ll sense a lot of energy around learning and sharing information that leads to innovation, growth, and overall job satisfaction.

Conclusion

Effectively implementing your knowledge management initiatives requires you to build partnerships with people in the organization who will have to invest in it, be involved with it, and are most impacted by it. The more effectively you’re able to communicate and demonstrate the positive effects your initiatives can have on the overall health and future of the organization, the more likely executives are to champion your efforts and the less resistance you will encounter from other stakeholders in actualizing your vision. Are you having trouble getting your executives to prioritize knowledge management? EK can help.

This is an article that has been brewing at the back of my mind for a while. As I have engaged with more and more organisations, on the topic of “Knowledge Management Strategy”, it has been proven over and over again that most of us are making the same mistake: We tend to think that transforming our teams and our companies into a “Knowledge-centric organisation” is all about acquiring the latest collaboration tool, or (re-) defining our processes and scorecards. I can tell you with confidence that it is not.

True Knowledge Management is about attitude and mindset above all else. It is about the culture in your organization and whether you and your leadership are fostering an environment that allows people to be truly collaborative. Talking about “growth mindset”, “customer obsession” or having a “bias for action” is all well and good but do you, and more importantly, do your co-workers truly believe it? And are you all living it?

Are your leaders, on all levels, walking the talk? Is your performance management and reward systems set up to incentivize people for impact and results, as opposed to making the score card or blindly following the process? Does your organization and culture encourage people to follow their passions and be creative? Are they allowed to come up with crazy ideas, take risks, fail and learn from it without being punished, just as much as they are rewarded for meeting or exceeding the expectations that “the system” has defined for them? Is doing your job and doing it well more important than taking initiatives and running with your ideas?

Having your leaders demonstrate and live an open and honest, collaborative style, being approachable and open to new ideas and new ways of tackling problems, while recognizing that also a failed initiative has its benefits, is key. As is learning from your own and others’ mistakes.

So, let’s completely ignore the scorecards and incentive compensation models for a while and focus on a few fundamental questions, that may help you start thinking about what company culture you have today and where you want it to be tomorrow:

1.      Do the people in your organisation feel safe to be creative and collaborative? Do they feel safe to fail without being shamed?

2.      Do you understand what motivates people outside of the scorecards and incentive compensation models? On a personal level, not just on a professional level.

3.      Is there room for informal groups to form, address problems and create solutions, even if it is outside the formal company structure? Basically, is there room for taking initiatives?!

A safe environment

I find this is the most fundamental aspect in building a collaborative and knowledge-centric team. If people do not feel that it is OK to ask “stupid questions” or propose “crazy ideas”, you will never build and grow knowledge at an effective rate – you will regurgitate what is acceptable and established but you will not evolve. Classic, hierarchical structures where people feel they have to run everything up and down the chain, before taking action or starting an initiative, is very counter-productive to collaboration and innovation. 

Understanding what drives people

What makes your people tick? What makes them jump out of bed in the morning and be truly inspired to do their best? This is not necessarily all about allowing people to follow their passions (or overlook their day job) but it can be as simple as enabling them to work when and from where they feel the most inspired. Or when/how it best supports their family situation. As long as people do good work and make an impact, does it matter if they do it between 9 and 5 in the office or can they actually do more and better at another time or location? This is where modern workplace tools intersect and can make a difference in how you enable your workforce.

Informal vs formal teams

We talks so much about “diversity and inclusion” in corporate America, and around the world, today but what does that really mean? Does it mean we put quotas on hiring across gender, ethnicity and geography – or does it mean we allow and encourage people to connect and collaborate with people they think can help solve a specific business problem? Or take a “crazy idea” from being just an idea to something real? “Cross-team collaboration” is a common term these days but is it something that is pushed for the sake of pushing it, or does it happen spontaneously because your people recognize the value of connecting with people from other teams, geos or companies?

I realise this article probably raises more questions than it provides answers and that was exactly my intent.

I don’t have a silver bullet for you. I am not going to tell you that if you scrap your utilization-based incentive compensation model, and replace it by something else, it is going to solve everything. That may be an idea and something you want to consider but that all depends on what behaviours you see, and the behaviours you would like to see, in your organization. If you want to foster a truly collaborative environment that takes more than modernizing your performance management- or reward system.

You need to think about the culture you have and what culture you want. And hopefully this article will help you start that thinking process!

As always, I welcome your thoughts and your comments - and please remember that all of my thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own and should not be interpreted as official, or a reflection of, those of my employers - past or current.