Looking Out and Linking In

A colleague from an executive search firm recently asked me this question:

Are you finding LinkedIn to be better than Outlook? I am struggling a bit with how best to utilize LinkedIn. Plus, we are debating how best to use it at work.

Good question as many of us fight to keep current as we push the envelope of possible professional (or unprofessional) contacts.

I find resonance in the anonymous phrase: “In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice, they’re not.”

So it should be much easier to use LinkedIn as users no longer must take (and bill) time to update customer/client information as folks are doing that themselves, with an accuracy as close to 100% as possible, theoretically. However, I find that in practice I still rely on my Outlook auto-fills when sending emails and only go to LinkedIn when something bounces back.

I have pinged them to find more information and will add when I learn more.

Absurdism and Organizational Storytelling

I was today reflecting a bit on Absurdism, which is a philosophical stance that has resonated with me for many years, and storytelling. One of the tenets of the absurdist move is that, while there may be no ultimate meaning or value in existence, the human condition does not allow us to ever really know; however, the pursuit of that happiness, through exemplars and acts of meaning and value, can remain a worthy and noble adventure.

Storytelling reflects this philosophy in that it does not provide certainty in the form of models or truth-propositions to be tested but rather speaks to subjective struggle – the Sisyphus myth is a central reference – reflecting the hero’s journey with tragic or comedic result (in the sense of comedy with the implied message that “all is right with the world and current social ethics are more or less correct). Thus the many different paths one chooses to travel are not necessarily without meaning to the individual but rather reflect the impossibility of choicelessness in an imperfect world without knowable certainty.

In organizational approaches, the philosophy helps to ground the value of the case study/story while providing working examples of the compelling claims of models and methods that as consultants and academics, we strive to communicate to various audiences, organizations and communities.

Now back to my Cool Ranch Doritos.
(This blog is unaffiliated with Doritos or FritoLay, Inc. Though if they'd like to send me a box I won't object.)

Knowledge Management for National Security

Someone once said... (and I don't know who said it, but as a blogger who cares if I cite my sources): "When it is time for the wheel to be invented, the wheel is invented." Truer words were never spoken, had I spoken them myself, which I have and will hereby take credit for unless anyone wants to take credit for it (and please cite your source).

Now to the nutmeat: The Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age. Word up. You guys rock. In synch.... with the Federal Knowledge Management Initiative spearheaded by Neil Olonoff (don't know who he is? That's the way he likes it!) and the Federal KM Working Group of which I, humbly, am still hanging on as co-chair, after leaving Federal service for digs at Marymount University in Arlington (Ballston), Virginia.

Anyways. The Markle Task Force penned a pretty parchment for distribution around New Rome Post-Emperor-Bush-back-to-the-Republic-Obama Administration, a.k.a. Washington, D.C. The hired help who crafted the concepts have probably not received proper props for their creative handiwork, though I suspect those listed Members of the Steering Committee were in much appreciation of their fine tapestry of thought on the subject of managing knowledge and information. Their backing will go a long way in the promotion of more efficient and effective government, which should translate to lower taxes, but probably won't.

Nutmeat in a nutshell: people don't talk to one another in the cornucopia of departments, agencies, et al that is the Federal Government. Nor, it turns out, do their laptops, desktops, crack-berries, Spi-Pods or whatever new tinkertoy some forced-out-of-Hollywood-go-back-get-a-degree-in-computer-science CA whiz jockey is going to market next. It's a problem. Furthermore, anyone with a Ph.D. in moviewatching (e.g. Americans) know that when various entities are after the same bad guy they often stumble over each other, all in the name of protecting their turf instead of sharing know-how in a coordinated effort ("Don't give me that jurisdiction crap." - The Matrix). Witness the rise and fall of the Department of Homeland Security as the most obvious example. (Sidenote: the year of the formation of DHS, I predicted at a conference on KM and homeland security that DHS was doomed as long as they saw integration primarily as an information-sharing problem rather than an organizational cross-cultural communication problem and gave them two years before they had a major PR crisis on their hand. Prediction delivered.)

Another sidenote. When my mother asks me, "Son, what the heck is knowledge management??" I say to her: "Have you ever known an organization where the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing?" She: "Yes, that's pretty much any big company." Me: "So that's a knowledge management problem." She: "I guess in the Federal Government it must be an even bigger problem since they're spending taxpayer's pesos (mom currently lives in Mexico) and need to be careful about what they spend, right?" Me: "Must be!" Silence. She: "So what are you folks up in Washington doing about it?" Me: "Heck, mom, I'm just a business professor now. I don't know anything. She: (sidebar, in a whisper, to reader: "actually, he knows everything, but likes to play stupid. tee hee!" Me: "Thanks for your input, mom. We'll leverage your intellectual capital at the next roundtable discussion where such optics will need to be prosecuted in a timely manner, according to relevant specifications, regulations, and reverberations." End of sidenote.

Five words (or short phrases) to remember and share with whomever you know in any branch of Government: We need KNOWLEDGE SHARING, TRANSPARANCY, SECURITY/PRIVACY, INCENTIVES & MEASURES, AND COMMUNITIES.

Hmmm... a useful nmeumonic?

K..S..T..S..PR..I...M..A..C.

Let's make it five words, okay?

Sharing, Transparency, Security, Incentives, and Communities.

STSIC

Well, you can come up with your own. I'm out of coffee.

Until next week.... when my position will be turned over to dun-da-da!
.
.
.
(wait for it!!!)
.
.
.
(so close!!)
.
.
.
ah, but no. You'll have to wait until next time. Sometimes this happens. Don't let it affect your self-esteem.

KM is Dead! Long Live KM!

This is a theme I have and will be touching on over the months and years. In a conversation to myself the other day - I'm a Gemini (not CapGemini) - I asked myself, "hey, isn't Knowledge Management dead already? Dave Snowden seemed to think so in 2007 at that salty talk in California!" And didn't I just leave the U.S. Government Agency ranked #1 (it is currently 0900 hours) in KM and Leadership, where I (supposedly) was paving the way for KM? And, hey, wait-a-dang-minute! -I- just got elected Co-Chair for the Knowledge Management Working Group in 2008! So that MUST mean that KM is alive and well, right??

Well, right now things are on hold a bit as I transition to my new position as a full-time tenure-track faculty member of Marymount University's School of Business. Although Jeanne Holm, the other Co-Chair, working at NASA, is doing a lot of things that Jeanne Holm does. I'm sure whatever it is, it will BLOW YOUR MIND. According to her Facebook page, she is right now, "looking at using virtual worlds for social issues." Hmm. Sounds expensive, but cool.

So today, my feeling about KM is that it is really a mishmash of some organizational behavior models and development practices... with a little flair. Enabled, of course, by information technology. I'm mean. Ch'yuah. You would have to have been social networking under a rock over the past few years not to know what I'm talking about.

Throw in a little corporate university, lessons learned programs, maybe a community-of-practice or a thousand, and you have it: a full-fledged, top-notch, rinky-dinky, Twenty-First Century* KM Suite! Or System. Or Program. Or Office. Or whatever. Just call it KM, and you'll get to look at all the cool sites.

So that is what my definition of KM is this morning: an ongoing conversation about the most compelling technologies, practices and insights for learning from one another that are changing our world. And it is definitely time for a change in the way we share knowledge across the Federal space. Or private space. Or just: share.

* Recognizing that by the time the 20th was at this stage, in 1908, the first fatal air crash occurred on September 17. Orville Wright was flying a plane that crashed, killing poor S.C. Lieutenant Thomas Selfridge, his passenger. If one parallels or conflates the importance of the airline industry with KM, you can see clearly that by the time you are on your thirteenth bio-copied kidney, KM will be a mature industry.

Why Academics Are Liberal

I was not sure whether to post this to my personal page or professional page. The two seem so intertwined. Do you feel that way? Especially when politics are involved.

This current presidental contest has muddied my sense of keeping politics out of the classroom. However, as I teach a course on leadership, management and organization, and given that the U.S. Government is predicated on effectiveness in all of the above, I feel it is fair game to discuss in a university setting. Fortunately my graduate students agree and this past Fall semester led to a lively discussion.

Here's the rub: I have seen research over the years that talk about the liberal academic "elite" (like, we can't suck our fat brains through a garden hose?). Somewhere there is the notion that "we" are "brainwashing" people into becoming "liberals." Egad!

It seems that the concern over the few decades about the decline of our educational system has come home to roost. What are they teaching in civics classes these days? In my experience over the years, the citizenry seems to respect less and less the need to achive a modicum of reasonable analysis and debate in the mediated political universe of discourse.

This is unfortunate, and often leeds to accusations by the right regarding the so-called "elitism" of the highly-educated. Let me attempt to shed some light on why a correlation exists between education and liberal thought.

A western liberal education is about the inclusion of people. We see it in the theories of organization that we study. As a professor, I try to bring these principles into the classroom, so that we learn from each other as well as from our academic ancestors.

Inclusiveness and diversity means drawing out all of our collective talents to be the best we can be, not despite our differences, but because of our differences.

We are stronger in our human groupings when we learn not just to tolerate differences, but to proactively respect differences.

Respecting differences means holding a conversation around the whys and hows to build an understanding of the other. One does not have to accept the views of the other, but as cognizant human beings we need to learn to listen with great perspective and humility.

Learning to listen is one of the first, and ongoing steps for becoming an effective leader.

A Conversation with Dr. Kull

In this interview, conducted by a colleague, I share my story and purpose for pursuing an academic career.

A New Egalitarianism. Or, Flat is Cool.

The web continues to thrill me. In Western cultures, liberalism has taken many forms but none so gallantly as the world wide web. One click is as good as another. Click here and Hillary Clinton pops up, click there and some teenager tells us her story. People are people. Around the world, while dour eyes are on the broadcasts of violence and division, other, fresher and younger eyes are on webcasts of sharing and interconnectivity. The world is indeed flat, and flat is cool.

Perhaps we can look to Web 2.0 to see how it has and will transform society. I know that among my friends and professional associates, we are using Facebook, LinkedIn and other sites to amplify our ability to connect with each other and each other's network.

But it is not just about connecting. It is about realizing a world that meets and transcends human needs. In every management university, at some point Maslow's heirarchy of needs is pulled up. You remember it, the 5 levels: physical, security, belonging, ego, self-actualization - right?

What is interesting to me is that you can spin these concepts out and look at the information ecosystems we inhabit and ask simple questions that mirror this model: "What human need is being addressed with this new technology (fill in the blank)."

So perhaps let's think about it this way:

Content as level 1. This is about basic access to documents and files.

Context as level 2. This is about securing knowledge artifacts in a shared environment.

Cooperation as level 3. Belonging, but only to play the role you are handed. Conversation around takes place in work communities around knowledge artifacts.

Contribution as level 4. Ego and esteem, in pursuit of the greater good. Bloggers and those with a need to share their knowledge and expertise. Knowledge artifacts are created by individuals.

Collaboration as level 5. True creativity and problem solving, collectively. Social interpretations, reconstructions, and the "universe of discourse" where knowledge artifacts are created by egoless groups.

I am speaking on this at the e-Gov KM Conference in Washington, D.C. April 28-29, 2008. I will try to post the video from that panel session here.

Ironically, Maslow's heirarchy may help us to become the kind of people who deserve an authentic and flat reply to bureaucracy and nihilism. It is time for a new egalitarianism. I add my voice to the many who call for more voice in support of fostering democratic principles of leadership within organizations and across the web of humanity.