| For fifteen years, since the discipline called ‘Knowledge Management’ was invented, my ideas on how best to accomplish its lofty goals (improving front-line worker productivity and innovation through better knowledge-sharing and collaboration) have evolved continuously.
Now. at last, I think I have a framework that applies to just about any organization. It’s pragmatic, and less ambitious than many such frameworks. It responds to what I keep hearing from people on the front lines of organizations — it addresses the real problems that most people have finding and using information effectively. It is focused on context and connectivity rather than on content and collection, on personalization and engagement and enablement rather than monster repositories and websites. Two months ago I summarized this, and now, whenever I am asked to speak about KM or social networking (which is often), this is the gist of what I tell them. Since it’s short, I’m repeating the whole article rather than linking back to it: —————–
In a recent post where I waxed rhapsodic about how the best approach to everything could be reduced to three magic words (love, conversation, community), I presented this one-sentence summary of how this might apply to knowledge management (KM): KM is simply the art enabling trusted, context-rich conversations among the appropriate members of communities about things these communities are passionate about.
In another recent post I laid out how the work of information professionals is now being done in (what I consider) leading organizations, around five key types of deliverables: awareness products, research products, guidance products, self-assessment and connectivity tools, and facilitated events. At the request of several readers, I’ve pulled this all together in the table above into a framework for what some have called KM 2.0, but which I prefer to call KM 0.0, because it’s getting back to the roots of why and how people share what they know. It could also be called PKM — Personal Knowledge Management — because it’s about self-managed content and peer-to-peer connectivity. I think the yellow column above — the well-worn and failed traditional approach to KM that many of us tried to institute in the 1990s, based on content and collection — is pretty self-explanatory, and depressing as a legacy. The green column above is slowly evolving in many organizations, but not because knowledge ‘leaders’ and managers have realized its potential. Rather, the emerging KM 0.0 is being instituted by people on the front lines and at the edges of organizations — working around the established systems and security standards of the organization. Most of this KM 0.0 stuff is inexpensive and ubiquitous, so enterprising information and IT professionals can introduce it without having to get permission and resources from management. Here’s a walk-through of what it comprises:
These eight components of KM 0.0 / PKM are the antithesis of what most large organizations provide as Knowledge Management resources. Most of them are quite simple and inexpensive to implement. They simply enable trusted, context-rich conversations among communities that care.Imagine that. |
February 15, 2008
Friday Flashback: KM 0.0 — A Pragmatic Approach to Social Networking and Knowledge Management for Business
February 14, 2008
What Can We Do to Reduce Animal Cruelty?
![]() Hardly a day goes by without another gruesome story of cruel atrocities against animals. The latest revelations (don’t click this link if you’re squeamish) about the horrific suffering inflicted on animals transported live huge distances in tiny cramped stifling hot spaces without food or water (they have to be alive when slaughtered to conform to the grotesque, painful, ritualistic slaughtering standards of the world’s fastest-growing religions) come as no surprise to animal welfare activists. Massive, monstrous factory farms that reduce living, feeling creatures to milk and meat machines, in lifelong misery and suffering. Slaughterhouses whose activities are so heartless and barbaric that a single visit can leave you traumatized for life. Testing labs that profit by torturing animals because it’s cheaper than other methods of demonstrating product safety. Puppy mills (many run by ‘quaint’ religious groups) that breed sickly animals non-stop under unimaginably dreadful conditions, just for profit. And some of the animal cruelty designed to procure organs, tusks and other parts from (often endangered) species as quack cures and health enhancers defies description. It just goes on and on. Regular readers know that I’ve largely given up on political solutions to complex problems. There is just too much money greasing too many greedy political palms to ever permit the passage and enforcement of any kind of reasonable animal welfare regulations. So what can we do? First, we can refuse to buy the products of companies that profit from animal cruelty. Become a vegetarian or a vegan. If you can’t do that, buy only locally-produced, free-range meats from small farms whose owners you know personally. It’s good for the local economy, for your health, and for the animals. And boycott farms that produce, and restaurants that serve, meats from confined milk-only-diet baby animals (e.g. veal). When you buy health, personal and chemical products, buy only those clearly certified as not tested on animals. The standards are poor, inconsistent and sloppily regulated, but they’re a start. Or make your own products from simple natural ingredients (saves money too). Never buy animals from puppy mills or pet stores. If you are looking for a pet, please select one from an animal shelter. And make sure it’s neutered. If you choose a cat, please do the birds a favour and keep it indoors. And please don’t keep animals caged in small spaces or tied up. Confinement is crueler than pain. We’ll never get the laws changed, or the religious practices changed. People have been trying to reform animal cruelty laws and religious practices for centuries, with virtually no success. Of course we should keep trying, and identify and vote for candidates who take no money from Big Agribusiness or Big Pharma. But political activism will never be enough. What we can do is starve the organizations that profit from animal cruelty — factory farms, slaughterhouses, Big Agribusiness and Big Pharma, pet stores, fur merchants, irresponsible restaurants, cosmetic, health product, personal care and chemical companies, and transportation companies that ship live animals. Only when enough of us buy intelligently (or, more accurately, stop buying ignorantly) will we have enough of an effect to make animal cruelty unprofitable. And onlywhen it becomes unprofitable will it stop. |
February 12, 2008
We Need Experimenters, Not Leaders
![]() For the last eight years, the US treasury has been plundered by the thieves of the Bush Administration, doling out handouts to corporatist friends (and undoing legislation and refusing to enforce what little corporatist regulation remains) in return for campaign contributions, future jobs and other favours. Bush has pursued an unjustifiable private and personal ideological war that has cost a million lives and a trillion dollars. The US is now technically bankrupt, public services have been hollowed out to the point they are dysfunctional to non-existent, and the country’s reputation internationally is in tatters. This is the legacy of a regime that promised a new form of leadership both before and after 9/11. There could be no better demonstration that relying on self-serving and self-proclaimed ‘leaders’ to do things for you is a ruinous path. Yet what are Americans rallying around now? Different self-serving and self-proclaimed leaders ambiguously promising ‘change’. How far will the cult of leadership in the US (and it’s spreading worldwide, like a toxic disease) go? In business, ‘leaders’ are paid obscene sums of money (tens to hundreds of millions of dollars each per year) to offshore jobs, reduce quality and services, close down operations, merge with other organizations with their own self-serving ‘leaders’, and otherwise cripple the US economy in the interests of ‘maximizing shareholder value’ (no accident that these ‘leaders’ are paid mostly in shares, so it’s their value they’re maximizing). Millions blindly follow religious ‘leaders’ who preach hatred and suppression of basic human rights and freedoms, and the popularity of such ‘charismatic’ despots is growing by leaps and bounds. Drug addled professional actors, singers and athletes attract groupies and awards and fortunes and the adoration and emulation of millions, as part of the celebrity leadership cult, and this popularity can often be parlayed into political or business ‘leadership’. And universities charge extravagant sums for ‘executive’ programs that presume to teach ‘leadership and management’, while meanwhile, because of a desperate shortage of entrepreneurial skills, most graduates can look forward to a life of wage slavery working for these ‘executives’, many of whom had their ‘leadership’ positions bought for them by rich parents. As I reported a couple of years ago, Peter Block, one of the founders of the discipline of Organizational Development, thinks that, in business at least, it’s absurd: “Leadership” is a well-developed misconception. The dominant belief is that the task of leadership is to set a vision, enroll others in it and hold people accountable through measurements and rewards. It’s a patriarchal system used to create high performance through centralization of power. Most leadership training focuses on how to be a good parent. We teach how to “develop” people, as if they were ours to develop. We do a lot to create the notion that bosses are responsible for their people. All that parenting has the unintended side effect of creating deep entitlement and having employees stay frozen in their own development. Most management techniques are ways of controlling people so they feel good about being controlled.
These are the most common questions I get from my clients. “How do I get people to ’Ķ” and you can fill in the blank after that. My favorite is, “How do I get people on board with my ideas/visions/whatever.” My response is, “How do you know you’Äôre in the boat?” These are the wrong questions. They’re the questions of a parent about recalcitrant children. As soon as you start the sentence, you’re acting as a sovereign. All of these are components of the patriarchal way of thinking that dominates our culture. Put this in boldface: They are not your children. Once you realize that, real engagement is possible. We don’t need ‘leadership’ or ‘leaders’. What we need is experimenters.The way to create working models that work better than the dysfunctional ones we have now, in a complex system where no one is in control and no one has the answers, is to try things. A lot of small-scale experiments, bold, different, even wacky. And then compare notes with each other about what works (and why) and what doesn’t (and why not). That will allow the successful experiments to spread, virally, and be adapted and improved. Eventually, bottom-up, it will allow us to create decentralized community-based self-managed political, economic, educational, and social systems that actually work well, for each community. Unlike most ‘leaders’, experimenters are:
That’s what we need. We won’t find it in one or a few people. We have to find it within all of us. To do that we have to give up on ‘leaders’ and take charge of our own lives, collaboratively, as peers. Who’s ‘leading’ in government, in business, in religious and educational and social organizations doesn’t matter. The power is in all of us. Category: How to Save the World
|
February 11, 2008
Twelve Things I Love About You
![]() Lately I’ve been thinking about the qualities that the people I love have in common. And about the qualities that I look for in prospective collaborators and partners in various ventures — projects, enterprises, communities. And about the qualities I treasure in a friend. And about the qualities I try to exemplify myself, in practicing to Let-Myself-Change to be a better model, in trying to make the world a better place.. It turns out they’re all the same qualities.
As I was compiling this list it occurred to me that these are also the qualities we, as writers, hope to attract and bring out in our readers, and the qualities that, as readers, we value in good writers. So now you know, dear readers, why I love you so much I am compelled, out of joy and the privilege of your attention and the desire to keep you coming back, to write my heart out, every day, a total so far of 5,000 pages, 25 books’ worth of what I know and think and care about. I think you, those of you who stick around, exemplify these twelve qualities. And your attention and appreciation, more than anything else, has informed and defined my journey to learn and discover and convey and start to make a difference in this world. This blog really has been, from the start, a collaboration, a partnership with you. I’m honoured to be in your company, dear collaborators and partners in love and conversation and community. Happy Valentine’s Day. Image from DoggyBloggy.com Category: Let-Self-Change
|
February 9, 2008
Saturday Links of the Week — February 9, 2008
![]() and you thought you had a lot of snow…Kevin Cameron’s recent photo of snow in Japan. Love Conversation Community And Do We Know What We Want at All?: Patti Digh brilliantly suggests that as important as it is to ask for what we want, to strive for what we want, the snag is often that we really don’t know what that is. 37days is now officially my favourite blog in the world. Defining Friendship, or Not: Pohangina Pete McGregor plays a bit with us, after promising to define or explain what friendship means to him. But in the end, as always, he delivers. His prose is pure poetry, and his photography is divine. Show, don’t tell. Business Innovation Environment We Have to Think Differently About the Environment: An interesting report says political activism won’t save the environment, that it will take a whole new (or old) way of thinking. Sharon Astyk says we should follow the ‘church model’ (engaging the community) of activism (thanks to David Parkinson for the link). And one enviro community, FactorE Farm, has developed an ‘open source’ clay brick maker that could make environmentally responsible building more affordable. Most Biofuels Use More Energy Than They Produce: Meanwhile, two new studies reveal the corn ethanol craze for the corporatist scam it really is. Don’t Watch This Video: Institutional animal abuse is endemic in Big Ag oligopoly factory farms, with the complicity of the Bush regime and the impotent USDA,but the infamous video at least is waking up some people to this atrocity. Please don’t watch it; the article tells you all you need to know. Politics Afghan Insanity: Canada continues to risk its soldiers’ lives to prop up a corrupt, torturing misogynist Afghan regime. A journalist is about to be executed there by the government for questioning the fundamentalists’ view of marriage. Clinton’s Health Plan More Inclusive Than Obama’s: That’s the only real difference in platforms between them that I can see. Of course neither plan is likely to make it through the corpocratic US blockades. |
February 8, 2008
Friday Flashback: Figments of Reality
![]() Two years ago, I wrote a two part review of Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen’s 1997 book Figments of Reality: The compelling thesis of the book: Living species, including humans, are emergent properties of (what Daniel Dennett has labeled) the ‘pandemonium’ of the body’s semi-autonomous processes — ‘We’ are a complicity of the separately-evolved creatures in our bodies organized for their mutual benefit i.e. we are an organism. And our brains, our intelligence, awareness, consciousness and free-will, are nothing more than an evolved, shared, feature-detection system jointly developed to advise these creatures’ actions for their mutual benefit. Our brains, and our minds (the processes that our neurons, senses and motility organs carry out collectively) are their information-processing system, not ‘ours’.
For those looking to understand why they’re not entirely in control of their own behaviour, and enthusiasts of the issue of ‘free will’, read my review and then pick up a copy of the book. When you see yourself as a complicity and not as an entity, it changes your whole worldview, andgives you a new appreciation of Gaia — how the world really works. |
February 6, 2008
The Future of the World
![]() Some time ago several people sent me the photo above, of wild horses in an abandoned area near Chornobyl, on the Ukraine/Belarus border. Animals in the area after the nuclear plant explosion 22 years ago died horrible deaths (their thyroids literally disintegrated) but gradually animals that spend only part of their time in the radioactive zone have returned and now flourish. Much of the area has been declared a nature preserve (though the Ukraine proposes to use it as a profitable dump site for nuclear waste for other countries) and the horses above were introduced deliberately — they are not feral animals, but a rare species (Przewalski’s) that has never been domesticated. Animals in the area are still radioactive (and would be toxic to eat) but those born with deformities are apparently being naturally removed from the gene pool. And now, in our desperation to keep the unsustainable going, just a little longer, we are re-embracing nuclear energy as the great hope for combating global warming. I can only shrug. There is no point arguing with those who cannot and will not hear. It occurred to me, looking at these magnificent animals in this strange, beautiful, poison place, that this is what the world will look like, in the not too distant future, when the human species is gone (or reduced to marginal, harmless numbers on the downside of the bell curve). And I recalled John Gray’s words: We can dream of a world in which a greatly reduced human population lives in a partially restored paradise; in which farming has been abandoned and green deserts given back to the earth; where the remaining humans are settled in cities, emulating the noble idleness of hunter-gatherers, their needs met by new technologies that leave little mark on the Earth; where life is given over to curiosity, pleasure and play. There is nothing technically impossible about such a world…A High-tech Green utopia, in which a few humans live happily in balance with the rest of life, is scientifically feasible; but it is humanly unimaginable. If anything like this ever comes about, it will not be through the will of homo rapiens.
It is not of becoming the planet’s wise stewards that Earth-lovers dream, but of a time when humans have ceased to matter. Homo rapiens is only one of very many species, and not obviously worth preserving. Later or sooner, it will become extinct. When it is gone Earth will recover. Long after the last traces of the human animal have disappeared, many of the species it is bent on destroying will still be around, along with others that have yet to spring up. The Earth willforget mankind. The play of life will go on. Category: Understanding How Gaia Works
|
February 5, 2008
Breakthrough Business Ideas for 2008
![]() Once a year HBR publishes a set of “breakthrough ideas” for business. The February 2008 edition has this year’s collection. Some of them are the usual psychobabble, technophilia and corporatist leader/strategic management nonsense that pervades most of the business journal echo-chamber, but there are seven interesting ideas in the list (the italicized prognoses are my own):
Category: Business Innovation
PS: Today is the 5th anniversary of How to Save the World.
I love, and read, all your comments and e-mails, but I can’t promise to respond tothem. |
February 4, 2008
A Miniature Truth: Becoming Authentically Yourself
Because of the recent publication of my article on Miniature Truths, and the fact that my trip to Belize gave me time, at last, to think, I decided to write a series of occasional articles on miniature truths. Note that such truths aren’t necessarily self-evident — we live in such a complex world, with such complicated man-made systems, that what might be self-evident to a child, or an alien visitor, will not be so to someone living in the midst of modern society.
I’ve already written about a few miniature truths that have emerged for me after a lot of thought and a lot of fortuitous experience; most of them are what I’ve learned about human nature in trying to make the world a better place:
During my pilgrimage to Belize, I came up with two more miniature truths. Here’s the first of them:
When I was a child, I was wild. Not in the sense of being unmanageable — I was quite attentive back then. Wild in the sense of uncivilized, raw, open, unrepressed, natural. I am told I was constantly taking my clothes off, not to show off but because I found them confining, unnatural, and saw nothing embarrassing about nudity. I was fearless (I did a photoshoot as a baby, hamming it up for the camera, that appeared on the front page of the local newspaper), I was imaginative (too much so for my neighbourhood friends, who couldn’t follow the games I invented), affectionate (my favourite game as soon as I could walk was ‘kissing tag’, since most of the kids my age in the neighbourhood were girls). Back then I struggled with communication (I didn’t learn to write reasonably well until my late teens, read little until then, and was nervous singing (I was a pretty good boy soprano) and talking in crowds. And then all the trappings of civilization came rushing in — the cruel games kids play, the preference for cute, athletic, clever, funny, well-coordinated friends (I got pretty gangly-looking as I aged, my voice broke so my singing teacher lost interest in me, and I was terribly coordinated — I couldn’t swim or dance and my penmanship was illegible. I began to acquire a lot of the fears, doubts, and prejudices of the groups I desperately wanted to belong to, which were only made worse as my advances were rebuffed). I became a loner, and not even a ‘smart’ one. By the end of high school, I’d acquired some talents that were popular, became a scholar, and regained my self-esteem in spades. But in the process, and even since then, I’ve picked up a lot of ‘stuff’ that isn’t me. I’ve become, in many respects, “everybody-else”. My days are now terribly busy, even without family responsibilities to look after. My job and my book both have a lot of self-imposed responsibility, that I took on willingly and knowingly, because they’re consistent with my passion for supporting Natural Entrepreneurs and building caring communities working to make the world a better place. But it’s slow going and time consuming. My blog carries with it the responsibility to write useful stuff, often, and to at least try to respond to readers’ comments. Looking at a backlog of over 100 e-mails and months of unanswered comments (not to mention an obsolete blogroll and table of contents, that will take weeks of work to update) I can only groan at the workload that lies ahead of me. In an article a month ago I wrote about how I thought I should ideally spend each day:
In fact, I’m not getting enough time for sleep, exercise, play, meaningful conversation, reflection, creation or action. Why? Because my life is full of time spent dealing with all the commitments I’ve taken on. And because I’m spreading myself way too thin, taking on too much. I keep forgetting how to say no. My twelve suggestions for making more time for what’s important in that earlier article just aren’t working. I suspect I’m caught up in Pollard’s Law myself, procrastinating on doing things that are important (and which I mostly really want to do) but that are time- and energy-consuming, in favour of things that are easy, undemanding. But underneath all that, I think, is this growing sense that I’m not myself. The real, authentic me would not take on commitments that would be unreasonable and tedious to discharge. The real, authentic me would not procrastinate. The real, authentic me would not find himself fretting about my work backlog, or watching TV because I’m just too tired to do anything else. So if (as I claim above) things are the way they are for a reason, what is the reason for this? How did I become “everybody else” and stop being “nobody but myself”, as cummings put it? I think it may be because, like most people, I respond to attention and appreciation, and love — and when I get it I agree to do almost anything to keep it coming. With love such a scarce commodity in our terrible world, is there anything we won’t do for it, including becoming “everybody else”? I think this is why I’m such a visceral believer in polyamorism, even though I haven’t been able to make the argument for it very articulately. If I felt, as a did as a young child, that I was surrounded by unqualified love, that it was everywhere and eternal, would I then stop taking on commitments I don’t want and can’t keep? Would I then stop changing myself into what I’m not, adding all this gunk that isn’t me, just to nurture a scarce and uncertain commodity that is naturally abundant? Is the lack of love, in family, in community, everywhere, what’s behind the loneliness, the desperation, the anomie that we see everywhere in our society, which becomes pathology and violence and misery and cruelty? I suspect the gunk we accumulate is mostly protective, the stuff of fear and uncertainty and anxiety over the potential loss of intimate connection, which we all need to survive. It’s not yet an intention, because I’m not sure I can do it, but I’m going to start working to be fearless about the loss of attention, appreciation, and love, to believe that it can be abundant, and to start saying no to things that are not really important to me, regardless of the consequences. And to do fewer things, the things I’m really good at (imagining possibilities, and writing) better, and exclusively. Perhaps in so doing I can become, for the first time in my life, a model — of courage, of generosity, of authenticity, of getting important things done. And in so doing, perhaps I can become, as I was as a young child, raw, naked, wild. Nobody but myself. Category: Let-Self-Change
I love, and read, all your comments, but I can’t promise to respond to them. If you want to chat, send me your GMail address and I’ll schedulea time to GTalk with you in real time..
|
February 2, 2008
Saturday Links of the Week — February 2, 2008
![]() Three weeks’ backlog of links, so I’ll keep it short: Art, Science, Literature, Philosophy:
Politics and Economics:
|








Because of the recent 


