|
In Search of a KM Model for Associations Step 1: The Genesis
Written by Jerry Ash and 19 collaborators participating in the Association CoP It's almost impossible these days not to have at least heard about the developing new strategy of knowledge management (KM), particularly among the members and the competitors of professional and trade associations. KM makes sense to many association executives because, in a way, knowledge has been the core business from the beginning. But the fact is, associations have unwittingly been in the knowledge business, and unless they figure out how to intentionally conduct themselves as knowledge businesses and maintain what could be a critical competitive advantage, they are going to get run over in a stampede of for-profit businesses that see an opportunity in taking over those markets. That makes the search for a KM model for associations critical. We, as associations, are not immune from the same management "diseases" that have led to the extinction of corporate giants in the past. We have to accept that we can not expect or count on "loyalty" or commitment to the cause or profession to keep us in business. We cannot rest on what we did well yesterday to guarantee success tomorrow. That realization is the first step toward the building of a knowledge-based, knowledge managed association. It would be ideal if this realization of the KM challenge were to occur at the top; in the board room or the executive suite. After all, KM is a strategy and its implementation depends on institutional commitment and interdisciplinary leadership. But a survey of the 50 early adopters of KM in the private sector found that many of the executive assistants to the CEOs hadn't heard of the terms "knowledge management" or "intellectual asset management." Some had heard of it and thought someone in the company was in charge, but few referred the caller to the right place. Executive assistants usually know the boss's lingo. So these 50 companies -- who were most often cited as the pioneers of KM -- did not generally have a high profile leader. Digging deeper, the seeds of KM were discovered within the bowels of these organizations, wherever a wise and visionary person toiled. It may be different in the association world. In some associations, champions are bubbling up among CEOs and members of the senior executive team, and the distinction between information and knowledge (with emphasis on the latter) is emerging as strategic planning committees develop goals for the coming years. An indicator of the high level of interest of association executives could be that a vast majority of the subscribers to what was then the Association KM-Net Discussion Group are CEOs or members of the executive team. However, the invitation list was sent primarily to members of the American Society of Association Executives and of the 2,000 invited, only 280 elected to join. Many say they are too busy for KM discussion. KMers argue that without KM discussion, executives will soon have plenty of time. Top level champions ultimately will be needed in order to fully implement a KM initiative. Some say the "real champions" hold the purse strings. It is true you can't fully organize association staff without selling the KM strategy to your members, and before you can sell it to your members you need a member to champion your cause. This member needs to be an influential participating person on the association's board or the equivalent in your association. Or, it may happen that the members may "sell" you on the need. Many professionals now consider KM a large part of their jobs. In the healthcare field, for instance, KM is integral to an understanding of disease conditions and treatment modalities. Customers of healthcare associations (members, hospitals, clinics and families) are putting more and more pressure on their associations to be knowledgeable about parent resources, home care resources, etc. as patients who are acutely or chronically ill are being discharged faster from the hospital and requiring more home care. Even more ideal would be a joint initiative between staff, leadership and an excellent consultant that understands the changes happening to the business of association members. Knowledge management and thinking as an organization in ways we have never thought before are the keys to the whole business or KM plan. But it takes everybody to make it happen -- the CEO, the entire staff and the entire leadership including the committee and task force chairs -- not just the board of directors. Implementing a plan is everybody's job. But such a joint initiative isn't possible until top leaders have joined the team and many associations have not yet found their high level knowledge champions. If your association's leadership is not in tune with the rapid changes happening out there and you can't do anything to help set this issue as a priority, one solution is for you to update your resume and move on to a business environment that wants people who see the big picture. But a better solution is to accept the challenge yourself. The "real champion" will be the one who begins the dialogue, finds the seeds of interest and leverages them into a full-blown strategy that has the support at the top. After all, that's the way it's happening in private industry most of the time. While associations may be practicing KM "unwittingly," they are doing it in some form. For example, a description of the performance of a receptionist in an assisted living facility set off a flurry of testimonials in the KM-Net Discussion Group about the "unsung heroes" in several organizations. Human resources can be the catalyst behind the KM movement. If HR considers its role to be the managers of the knowledge resource, then it can create a culture value that fosters, encourages and expects KM. The receptionist can often be the most powerful person you have on board because he or she often serves as that point of first contact. There is nothing lowly about the position. In fact, it is the manner in which we define positions and communicate those definitions which limits or expands the ability for people to fully participate as the knowledge managers they must become if associations are going to thrive and compete with for-profit entities. Some suggest we all must be KMers - managers of our own knowledge. So, knowledge management -- in some way -- is everyone's business and a KM initiative can spring from wherever it is practiced. But, we need to be careful not to confuse the knowledge user and the knowledge manager. Certainly every user needs to manage his or her own knowledge, as s/he does now with paper files, e-files, bookmarks, calendars, etc. Knowledge Manager refers to someone who has responsibility for managing the knowledge within a particular work unit or community of practice or across multidisciplinary lines. The term itself is not sacred, but the roles and responsibilities are very different. Therefore, it can be knowledge users who become the champions of KM even before a knowledge manager exists. And the champion KM user could be a good candidate for the role of knowledge manager once an association-wide movement begins. Or not. It will depend on the depth of knowledge the KM champion has acquired about KM. That can best be accomplished through seminars, articles, white papers and discussion groups, all of which are bountiful and available through the Association Knowledge Network (now the Association of Knowledgework). Some say that the first place to start a KM initiative is to determine why you want to do KM. What business issues does it help solve? That's good advice, but this article suggests that first there has to be someone who will ask why and answer the question - therefore, the KM champion comes first. Without the advocate, there can be no case built for (or against) a KM program. The general threats expressed in the KM challenge above are not enough to justify the sweeping commitment to KM that should follow. You need to understand why KM has become the new focus of Knowledge Age management and what opportunities as well as threats it may or may not present to your association. Most importantly, what will be the benefit to your organization? Beyond the fact that the currency of KM is squishy (intangible assets), KM can be a hard sell because it admittedly will not change an organization or industry in the short run. Certainly the deployment of some KM technologies can help bring short-term efficiencies that can help the MIDDLE line sooner rather than later, but the real payoff from KM is going to come much later, because ultimately it involves changing human behavior and the contracts that underlie the formation and sustainability of human communities. KM is an investment in the future viability and success of the association. We are talking about the emergence of a new paradigm for how businesses and institutions organize themselves in order to be successful in an economy that is no longer based on tangible assets; but rather, on ideas. That's not going to be an easy sell to executives or board members who, understandably, prefer a bird in the hand to two in the bush. But as Jim Botkin nicely summarizes in his latest book, Smart Business, holding onto to yesterday's model (which is the source of today's success) is suicide in most industries. Associations, for the most part, are less susceptible to quick shifts in the economy and they aren't as interested in the MIDDLE line as they are in the benefit to members. But some recognize that it is only a matter of time before associations are going to go the way of the typewriter if they don't start dealing now with the issue of what value associations may or can have in a world of free-flowing, easy-to-access, easy-to-network information and knowledge. While it is true that associations have been in the "knowledge business" for a long time, the fact is that only a few have actually awakened to that fact in the sense of doing something to capitalize on it. Still, all of this is generality. Once you have a knowledge champion, he or she will need to translate that into real terms for your organization and for your membership. You will need to establish a clear value proposition. The value proposition and a knowledge audit are strong allies. To establish the value proposition, you will need to translate all the KM theory into KM fact. The next step, then, is to do some kind of "audit" or "inventory" to determine what knowledge your association has, what it needs, and what it would take to get there. There is no way of predicting what the knowledge audit will unveil. Perhaps it will support those who envision associations as facilitators of the knowledge chase, with members being the managers of their own or their organization's knowledge. Or, perhaps associations will be in a dual role in the knowledge economy - assembling, packaging and disseminating knowledge on the one hand and providing a gateway to relevant information resources that reside on the Internet on the other. Information on the worldwide web can be overwhelming to individuals for whom time is becoming the scarcest resource. The future role of associations may be to provide links to their own and other sites where specific knowledge and information has been precisely organized for meaningful and rapid retrieval. Perhaps associations will actually perform searches and prepare individual reports or daily newspapers for each member with information culled for their specific interests. Perhaps that means leaping head-first into the technology, letting the association's information, data and communications systems drive the goals and objectives of the association. Or perhaps, as most Discussion Group participants suggested, form ought to follow function. If so, what are the functions? Perhaps the answer is for associations to provide a systematic process of human networking that will tap both the explicit and tacit resources of the association and the group it represents. Perhaps, but "perhaps" is speculative. Those association leaders who hold these visionary ideas may well be correct; but, these visions need to be tested against the results of a knowledge audit which seeks to learn what is known, by whom, and of what value it is to the organization and its members; and, most importantly how these resources are being managed now and how they should be managed in the future. There simply is no "cookbook" for the creation of a knowledge based, knowledge driven association that fits every organization's needs. KM is a creative enterprise, tailored to the needs and wants of each association. The knowledge audit is the place to begin and the next step to be discussed by the KM-Net Discussion Group. The results of the KM audit discussions will be the basis for the next White Paper. Collaborators: A special thanks to Michael Berens and Laura Noble. Among us, they are the ones most fully engaged in managing knowledge for their associations and yet they have been willing to liberally share their time and wisdom with the group. Others are also highly valued including all who collaborated on discussions that led to this white paper. The 19 collaborators include:
|
Realizing the
KM Challenge