Head of KM – example job description

Another example role description for you, this time for the Global head of KM for Herbert Smith freehills, the massive multinational law firm (found on LinkedIn).


It’s a really nice job description, with a good focus on the overall objective of the role (bullet point 1) and on change management (bullet point 6)

Primary Responsibilities:

  • Ensure all Practice Groups collaborate effectively and focus business services knowledge components on winning work and doing work more efficiently
  • Work closely with the global Knowledge and Learning leadership team and team members to achieve global strategic alignment.
  • Develop and execute a roadmap of clearly defined projects and initiatives aimed at supporting the firm’s knowledge management strategy, and the firm’s business strategy.
  • Create new internal support service roles, processes, tools, and fee-earner competencies aimed at evolving and modernising the knowledge and intelligence support services provided internally at the firm.
  • Identify and implement process, technology or resource change/transformation projects aimed at reducing the firm’s cost of production and maintenance of existing and new knowledge assets. e.g. document management systems, AI etc
  • Lead the change management of knowledge sharing In conjunction with other K&L teams
  • Drive a clear methodology around the transfer of tacit knowledge and reuse of best practice
  • Develop and launch new-to-market knowledge based products or services that create new or additional revenue streams for the firm, and increase the impact of current “thought-leadership” publication production processes.
  • Lead and represent knowledge management’s evolving service offering and capabilities during direct involvement with:
  • Legal Project Management function activities related to mapping legal processes – aimed at identifying and delivering enhancements to processes through knowledge services that positively impact the margin of the matter.
  • Business Development pitch creation and delivery, aimed at promoting the use and value of the firm’s knowledge services to prospects during the sales cycle.
  • Client Care activities, aimed at promoting the use and value of the firm’s knowledge services to clients to enhance revenue and/or client satisfaction and retention.
  • Develop and implement strategic initiatives aimed at reducing lawyer reliance on external subscription services.
  • Source and introduce new technologies, processes and/or resource models to increase the efficiency of relevant legal information delivery to fee earners in a right-time manner.
  • Oversee global legal content management and legal asset storage/repositories maintenance team so as to ensure that the firm’s key legal knowledge assets are harvested, stored, matured and re-used in an effective manner – and in a manner that aims to optimise the firm’s profit, reduce reliance on external sources, and reduce or eradicate manual asset maintenance burdens and costs.
  • Enhance and standardise existing global legal knowledge asset maintenance processes in a manner that reduces existing costs, decreases time taken to identify and edit legal content, and increases standardisation and risk mitigation/readiness.
  • Manage a global budget, ensuring that budget targets are met.

Key Performance Indicators:

  • The creation (in association with the Knowledge and Learning Leadership team) of a new target operating model and knowledge related role specifications for global knowledge personnel.
  • Cost reduction associated with knowledge asset maintenance.
  • Clear link to revenue creation target as a result of new client facing products and services.
  • Demonstrable link to the securing of fees from new clients based on collaborative involvement in sales pitches.
  • Demonstrable link to the increase of margin of selected strategic corporate transactions and/or dispute resolution matter types in collaboration with the Practice Group and/or the Legal Project Management team through the introduction of advanced knowledge management offering(s) or solutions.
  • Measureable impact on collaboration between practice groups e.g. number of client inactions with multiple practice groups in attendance.
  • Deliver to stated and agreed objectives within budget and on time.

Qualifications, Skills & Experience:

  • 10 plus years’ experience managing a knowledge management function at a senior level in a legal or professional services environment
  • A robust understanding of current and emerging technologies relevant to client-facing knowledge industrialisation, internal tacit knowledge transfer, storage and retrieval enablement, and advanced collaboration tools
  • Proven experience at running large change projects in a professional services firm
  • A track record of innovative thinking, and the development and successful delivery of client focused service delivery transformation involving effective organisation of a firm’s knowledge processes, systems and behaviours
  • Proven capability to independently develop, encourage and embed new ideas and approaches in a creative manner
  • Ability to collaboratively work with areas outside of the traditional Knowledge Management function
  • Commercial experience supporting the firm-wide leverage of knowledge assets, knowledge resources, and knowledge skills to support high margins
  • Experienced in dealing with ambiguity and adapting to changing circumstances

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

What does a Director of Knowledge Management for a legal firm do?

This month there were two “Director of KM” jobs advertised on linked-in.  Let’s see what this job entails.

Word cloud from the responsibilities list

“Knowledge Management” is a poorly defined term, and Knowledge Management jobs can range from low level data-entry clerks to high level strategic posts, and anything in between. 

However when you see “Director of Knowledge Management” vacancies, that tells you that this is a high level post. One of these advertised vacancies gives few details of the post, but the second, from CMS (the legal firm) gives a full list of responsibilities and characteristics. 
These are listed below.

Responsibilities

  • Conceiving, developing and implementing the firm’s knowledge management strategy. Promotion of a knowledge sharing culture. 
  • Acting as an ambassador and figurehead for knowledge in the firm. 
  • Working with the Head of Knowledge to drive continual Knowledge Management  service improvement, including the evaluation and exploitation of new technologies and resolving issues and barriers impacting on Knowledge Management  service delivery. 
  • Developing a cross firm knowledge community through facilitating communication and coordination between PSLs, information officers, Legal Project Managers, Business Managers, IT and others. 
  • Working with Practice Group Leaders to ensure appropriate provision of Knowledge to the practice groups. 
  • Working with the HR and L&D functions to ensure alignment of professional learning and Knowledge Management offerings. 
  • Working with the Marketing and Business Development function to build a client facing knowledge offering. 

Qualifications and characteristics

  • Prior experience of being a qualified lawyer prior to entering into a KM role. 
  • A minimum of 7 years’ KM experience operating at a senior level. 
  • A naturally confident leader and strategic thinker able to assess the firm’s future needs and align KM initiatives accordingly. 
  • An interest in, and knowledge of, technological advances and their potential impact on knowledge systems. 
  • A creative and commercial thinker who will come forward with new ideas and approaches. 
  • An ability to motivate and persuade lawyers to contribute knowledge and learning assets. 
  • A consultative approach – the ability to communicate effectively on both a practical and academic level with a willingness to listen. 
  • Experience of operating internationally and prepared to travel. 
  • Experience of creating and implementing new programmes and policies within a budgetary and time-critical framework. 
  • Advanced managerial skills with the ability to negotiate with and persuade others, not in direct line of report and working in close partnership with internal clients. 
  • Excellent communication skills with fluency in English, both written and spoken. Additional language skills would be an advantage. 
  • Ability to operate under pressure to resolve issues in a controlled and calm fashion 
  • Ability to operate and succeed in a fast-paced, highly intellectual, multi-tasking, client-service orientated environment. 
  • A team player with a ‘can-do’ attitude and a passion for excellence.

The responsibilities here are pretty generic, and not restricted to the legal sector. A Director of KM in any organisation would do much of this activity. However being a legal firm they are looking for a lawyer to take this role. 

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

More data on the health of KM (revised)

Is KM dying, alive and well, or on life support? Let’s bring some data into the debate (this post updated based on further data).

The debate about the health of KM is a perennial topic, with people variously claiming “KM is dead”, “KM is alive and well” or “KM is on life support”.  The item commonly missing in these claims is hard data; people instead going on their impressions, or on the bold claim of a replacement for KM that overthrows its older rival.

I have tried my best to bring some hard data into it, such as the apparent accelerating start-up rate of organisations, taken from the Knoco survey data (the counter-argument to which might be that more recent entrants to the KM game are more likely to have responded to the survey).
Here are some more data.
3 years ago I did a survey within LinkedIn, looking at the number of people in different countries with “Knowledge” in their job title (or or Conocimiento, or Connaissance, or Kennis, etc etc depending on language). From this I concluded that there are probably about 32,000 knowledge managers in the world, with the greatest concentration in Switzerland and the Netherlands, and the lowest concentration in Russia and Brazil.
This survey is easy to repeat, and to compare the number of people now with Knowledge or its equivalent in their job title, with the number of people then. The results for the top 10 countries in terms of search results are shown in the figure above and the table below.

total K people 2014 total K people 2017
USA
10483
12494
UK
3431
3989
India
3244
4228
Canada
1736
2000
Netherlands
1656
1988
Australia
1105
1388
Spain
820
788
France
803
1000
Brazil
733
988

In every case the number of people with a Knowledge job title has increased, but about 26%.

However the number of people from those countries on linkedin has also increased (thanks to Mahomed Nazir for pointing this out).

If we look at the number of people with Knowledge in their job title as a percentage of LinkedIn users, then things change, as the population of LinkedIn has grown a lot over the last few years.  The figures below represent the number of people from a particular country with Knowledge or its translation in their job title, per million LinkedIn unsers from that country.
K people per million LinkedIn users 2014 total K people per million LinkedIn users 2017
USA
101
97
UK
214
181
India
130
101
Canada
174
157
Netherlands
325
331
Australia
184
174
Spain
128
143
France
97
107
Brazil
41
33
Here some countries have seen a fall in the percentage of people with a Knowledge job title, others have seen a rise. On average, numbers have fallen by 6%.
So in conclusion, over the last 3 years, the number of people with Knowledge etc as a job title on LinkedIn has increased by 26%, but this becomes a 6% decline in percentage terms if you allow for the overall population growth of LinkedIn.
 Is this the death of KM? Unlikely.
Could it be a slow decline? Possibly. 
I think we need to collect more data like this over a longer time period, and see if any trends continue.

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

Process ownership and process owners in KM

The people who own the processes in an organisation are responsible for a big chunk of corporate memory. But who are these people?

Perhaps we ought to start with defining what process ownership actually means.

Process ownership is a key component of many management approaches such as business process improvement, six sigma, and Lean manufacturing, and there are many definitions available in the literature.  The definition below is a simplified version

A process owner can be defined as the person accountable for maintaining the definition, and the quality of a particular process.  They don’t have to operate the process themselves, but they need to make sure that the people who do operate the process have access to the documentation they need to operate the process in the (currently identified) best possible way.  

You can write a similar definition for Practice ownership, and in many ways the terms Process and Practice are used interchangeably in this blog post.

Why are processes important in KM?

Think about learning, and about corporate memory.

When a baby learns, they take stimuli and inputs from the outside world, compare these to existing mental models and responses held in their memory, and update these models and responses over time. 
But where is the memory of an organisation? You can’t rely totally on the memory of the employees to be the totality of the memory of the organisation, as employees come and go, and the human memory is, after all, a fragile and fickle thing, prone to many flaws.  In addition to this human organisational memory, we can make a strong case for organisational structures, operating procedures, practices and processes also forming a core component of organisational memory. 
Processes, practices and procedures are built up over time, and represent the company view of “how we do things”. Employees follow the processes, and repeat “how things are done”. The processes hold and propagate the patterns for behaviour, and for the way work is conducted. If the organisation is to learn, these processes must evolve over time.
The concept of evolving processes as representing corporate memory is recognised by many learning organisations. 
  • One of the learning professionals in the UK Military said to me “what is doctrine, if not the record of lessons learned?” (Doctrine is the military term for Process)
  • The head of Common Process at BP explained Common Process as being “the accumulated and embedded knowledge of how to operate”.

But while a baby “owns” her own memory and can update this unconsciously as new knowledge is gained, a corporate process requires conscious update, and needs someone – the process owner – to perform this update task.
Exactly who owns the process, depends really on the maturity of the process, as well as on the structure of your own organisation.  Some example process owners are listed below.

Technical authorities.

The technical authority role is used in many engineering organisations, for example NASA, to ensure that all operational decisions are made with reference to technical engineering knowledge and expertise.  Technical authorities might be individuals such as the chief engineer, the chief electrical engineer, or the head of marketing. They are generally the owners or custodians of internal standards and policies, and so can be considered to be a process owner when a process is fully defined by an internal standard.

When a process has been standardised, that generally implies that it is very well understood, and unlikely to change very much.  Changes to standards are rare, and caused only by major deviations from normal operations.  It therefore makes sense only to give process ownership to the technical authorities in the case of mature and well established processes, and even with these stanardised processes, there may be a need for additional knowledge of how the standards are best applied.

Subject matter experts.

The subject matter expert (SME) doesn’t necessarily have any Line Authority in an organisation, but has intellectual authority based on their expertise.  The subject matter expert is the company-designated person in the organisation who has the greatest expertise in a specific technical topic.  It therefore makes sense for them to be the process owner for their topic, because, in theory at least, they know more than anybody else about that particular topic.  It makes sense for the SME to be the Process Owner for any process which is mature enough, and well defined enough, for a single person to grasp it in its entirety.

Community of practice leader

Communities of practice can also take process or practice ownership.  The leader of the community of practice is the person who coordinates community activity, and should also make sure that community knowledge is compiled and documented.  It makes sense for the community of practice leader to be the process owner, when the process knowledge is dispersed within the community rather than being held by any one person.  This will be the case when a process is relatively new, is being widely applied in the organisation, and where knowledge about the process is still evolving.  So rather than a subject matter expert being able to hold all the knowledge in their own head, the community of practice owns the process, and the ownership role is coordinated by the community of practice leader.  There may often be cases where the community of practice can themselves keep the process up to date, perhaps through use of a wiki or other collaborative tool.  The community of practice leader, in this case, acts as the coordinator and editor.

Research and development team

Sometimes the process is very new.  Sometimes the process is only recently been identified, and is in the process of being developed through a program of trials.  Here the R&D staff own the process, and use the R&D program to define the process. I have been working with one research organisation who divides their areas of practice into “research fields”, and each of these research fields has an owner, who acts as process owner for this – as yet very immature – field of knowledge.

So we can see an evolution in process ownership as a topic matures – owned originally by research field owners, then communities, then SMEs, and finally by Technical Authorities, as shown in the picture accompanying this blog post.

The point, however, is that there needs to be ownership at every stage of the maturity of the topic, to ensure the corporate memory is maintained and update.

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

The role of corporate management in KM

Everyone has a role to play in KM, but what’s the role of corporate management?

Copyright-free image from pxhere

I pointed out last week that corporate management is one of the stakeholders for KM, and that they have certain needs from the KM program, but with these come responsibilities. Senior management support can make or break KM success, but what role exactly do they play?

Here are the highlights.

  • Managers need to endorse the knowledge management program, and be seen to be giving it their support, perhaps by drafting, endorsing and promoting a KM Policy
  • The endorsement extends to providing resources within their part of the business – the knowledge managers, the subject matter experts, the KM team. 
  • Managers need to help steer the KM program in their part of the business – to work with the knowledge management implementation team in order to help them understand which knowledge is strategic for the specific business unit or business group, in order that knowledge management activities can fully support the strategic business agenda. 
  • Managers need to lead by example. Knowledge management is not something which will only be done by the junior grades – the managers need to be involved as well. 
  • Managers at all levels need to take the lead in their part of the business in setting an expectation for managing knowledge. They need to make it clear what they expect to see 
  • Assuming managers have set expectations as described above, they need to follow up on these expectations. The organisation will be watching closely how senior managers deal with people who shirk their KM responsibilities.
  • Managers need to recognise and reward wisely, if knowledge management is to survive. It will send a very negative message if senior management reward and recognise the wrong behaviours, such as internal competition or knowledge hoarding. 
  • Managers need to provide challenge to the business; to continuously improve in what they do through applying knowledge from others, and to share their knowledge in order to help others to improve. 
  • Managers need to provide challenge to KM; to audit what they are doing, and continuously improve the KM Framework in support of the business.

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

10 things a KM champion needs to understand

Here are ten things a KM Champion needs to understand in order to do their job well.

Image from wikimedia commons

Understand your role
Discuss this with the KM team until you have a clear idea what your role as Champion entails. It may contain elements such as the following:

  • Development of KM strategy for your part of the business 
  • Deployment of a KM Framework (Roles, processes, technology and governance)
  • Promotion of KM behaviours and culture (Communication, Support, Coaching and Facilitation) 
  • Measurement and reporting of KM Activity and benefits

Understand your stakeholders
Find out what management need from KM, what you need from them, and the value proposition for management. Also find out what the knowledge workers need from KM, what you need from them, and what their value proposition is.

Understand your scope of work
What is in scope, and what is out of scope?

Understand the critical knowledge
Find out the critical knowledge for your part of the business, so you can focus only on the most valuable knowledge – the 20% of knowledge that will make 80% of the difference.

  • Is it new knowledge, where the focus is on rapid learning? 
  • Is it knowledge spread among many people, where the focus is on sharing good practice? 
  • Is it old knowledge which should be standardised? 
  • Is it knowledge of an expert, which should be captured?

Understand the KM Framework 
This is the framework of roles, processes, technology and governance that defines how knowledge will be managed in your organisation. You need to make sure you understand this completely, as this is what you will be trying to implement in your own project, department or division.

Understand the core KM tools and processes
You need to understand these, as you will be coaching people in their use, and facilitating some of the processes. These will include:

  • Tools and technologies for knowledge discussion, such as Peer Assist, Knowledge Exchange, and community forums 
  • Knowledge capture tools and processes such as After Action review, Retrospect,  lesson management systems and blogs   
  • Knowledge synthesis tools and processes, such as Knowledge asset creation and update, knowledge article creation and update, wikis and knowledge bases,.
  • Knowledge access and re-use tools and processes such as KM planning, and the use of search tools and people-finders.
  • Knowledge creation tools and processes, such as Deep Dive. 

Understand communities of practice
If communities of practice are included in your KM Framework then you need to understand how these work, and the roles, processes and technologies involved.

Understand the issues of implementing KM in your part of the organisation
Understand the barriers to KM and how to overcome them, and the enablers you can use. Understand the use of pilot projects and “proof of concept” activity.

Understand how to sell KM, and react to objections
Understand the influencing techniques you can use, and the use of social proof, in selling the concept of KM internally.

Understand KM Governance
This includes the elements of KM expectation, metrics and rewards, and support. Governance is the issue that will be most powerful in reinforcing KM behaviours, and you need to be able to explain your stakeholders how it works.

Contact Knoco for help in developing your understanding further. 

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

Lesson learning roles in the RCAF

Roles and Governance are often overlooked elements of KM. Here is a great example of a set of roles and accountabilities for Lesson learning within the Royal Canadian Air Force.

The example is taken from a web page dated 2015 called “Canadian Forces Aerospace Warfare Centre, Analysis and Lessons Learned“.

The RCAF have the following roles and accountabilities, shown in the diagram to the right, and described below:

  • A senior sponsor, known as the Lessons Learned Command Authority – this is actually the Commander of the RCAF, and is accountable to the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff for implementing and overseeing the Lesson Learned Programme. Note that the Chief of Defence Staff requires the RCAF to establish processes that add value to the existing body of knowledge, or attempt to correct deficiencies in concepts, policy, doctrine, training, equipment or organizations, and the Lessons Learned Programme is one response to this requirement.
  • A delegated customer/custodian for the Lesson learned program known as the “Lesson Learned programme Authority”. This is the Deputy Commander, who is responsible for all Air Lessons Learned matters, including maintenance and periodic review of the programme. 
  • A leader for the Lesson Learned program, called the Lessons-Learned Technical Authority. This is the Commanding Officer of the Canadian Forces Aerospace Warfare Centre, who reports to the Lesson Learned Programme Authority for lessons-learned matters, and who is responsible for executing all aspects of the programme with the help of a dedicated Analysis and Lesson Learned team.
  • Clear accountabilities for the leaders of the various divisions in their roles as Lessons Learned Operational Authorities, to effectively operationalize and implement the programme within their command areas of responsibility.
  • Each of these appoint a Lessons Learned point of contact to coordinate the Lessons Learned activities and functions for their organizations as well as to address issues that have been forwarded along the chain of command.
  • Wing Lessons-Learned Officers embedded in the organisation at wing and formation levels, who provide Lesson learning advice to the wing commander related to missions and mission-support activities.
  • Unit Lessons-Learned Officers within the RCAF units who coordinate the documentation and communication of what has been learned during daily activities; liaising directly with their relevant Wing Lessons-Learned Officer. These are like the Lesson Learned  Integrators in the US Army.
You can see how accountability for lesson learning comes down the chain of command (the red boxes in the diagram) from the RCAF Commander right down to Unit level, and how enabling and supporting roles are created at many levels – the LL Programme, the Divisional points of contact, the Wing LLOs and the Unit LLOs.

The principle of delegated accountability down the line management chain enabled by supporting resources is a good one, which can be applied in many organisational setting.

View Original Source (nickmilton.com) Here.

Example KM role description – IAEA

Here is another example KM role description – this time for a Knowledge Managment Officer at the International Atomic Energy Authority.

This is a pretty high level governance role for KM, and it is described here as follows:

Main purpose

The Knowledge Management Officer’s main purpose is to provide expert advice on the development and implementation of the IAEA Knowledge Management System.

Role

The Knowledge Management Officer is

  1. an expert in knowledge management, providing advice to identify, develop and implement effective knowledge management practices in the IAEA, and 
  2. coordinator and advocate of knowledge management-related practices and activities within the Secretariat. 

Partnerships

The Knowledge Manager Officer liaises with the Chair, the Scientific Secretary and the members of the IAEA’s Interdepartmental Steering Group for Corporate Knowledge Management (ISG/CKM), the Office of Legal Affairs (OLA), and the Management Coordinator/Advisor of the Department of Management and other IAEA Senior Managers in the development and implementation of the IAEA CKM System and promotes awareness and acceptance of CKM initiatives throughout the IAEA.

Functions / Key Results Expected

  • Develop departmental and cross-departmental systems and processes to ensure an effective and integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving and sharing IAEA information assets, as needed to enhance efficiencies and communication in support of a one-house approach and other modern management initiatives and processes, such as results-based management, risk management, quality management.
  • Provide expert advice to the Chair, the Scientific Secretary and the members of the Interdepartmental Steering Group (ISG)/Corporate Knowledge Management (CKM) on the development and implementation of the IAEA CKM System and follow up on the implementation of actions in the work plan and tasks.
  • Further the sustainability of OLA’s knowledge management processes, building KM capacity through training and transfer of knowledge and skills, integration of the IAEA CKM System in OLA and on related policy matters.
  • Develop new approaches for the Department of Management on matters related to the IAEA’s CKM System and in relation to streamlining of work processes to support the use of AIPS as a key CKM tool in the IAEA.
  • Identify, assess and recommend opportunities to further best practices in the IAEA’s CKM System.
  • Identify and recommend ways to create, share and utilize knowledge within the IAEA to contribute to a culture of knowledge sharing among cross-departmental teams to ‘institutionalize’ CKM practices.
  • Review and evaluate policies, procedures and related roles and make recommendations with the objective to support the sustainability and continuity of the IAEA’s CKM System.
  • Propose and coordinate communication and training programs designed to enhance awareness of the IAEA’s CKM System (for staff joining and leaving the IAEA).

Knowledge, Skills and Abilities

  • Project management experience and a proven track record of designing, planning and implementing KM-related initiatives, including organization-wide implementation of programs and events that involve knowledge creation and sharing.
  • In-depth knowledge of modern leadership practices and management concepts.
  • In-depth knowledge of techniques and methods for mapping/measuring/analysing business processes.
  • Experience in implementing change in an organizational environment and in CKM activities.
  • Extensive practical experience in applying information technology to the implementation of KM and knowledge sharing strategies.
  • Sound knowledge of the IAEA’s CKM System.
  • Experience in organizational/leadership development, management, coaching and training.

Education, Experience and Language Skills

  • Advanced university degree in knowledge management, business administration or related field.
  • Minimum of seven years of experience in knowledge management-related positions or other relevant experience.
  • Excellent command of written and spoken English essential. Knowledge of another official IAEA language (i.e. Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian or Spanish) an asset.

View Original Source Here.

A key lesson-learning role in the military setting

Lesson Learning is well embedded in the United States Army and forms a model which industry can emulate, especially when it comes to assigning knowledge management roles within the business.

www.Army.mil As explained in this excellent analysis from Nancy Dixon, lesson learning works well in the US Army.  This article describes some of the components of the learning system they apply, and mentions processes such as After Action Reviews and Learning Interviews, but also mentions  different roles with accountability for the lessons process. One of the key roles is the  Lessons Learned Integrator, or L2I.

The Lessons Learned Integrator role

The Centre for Army Lessons Learned  is deploying Lessons Learned Integrators in operational units and in other units such as training schools and doctrine centres. These L2I analysts gather lessons learned, research requests for information (RFI), and support the unit within which they are situated. They act as conduits for lessons in and out of the units. You can find various role descriptions for this post (e.g. this one), which suggest that the role primarily involves
  • Collecting, reporting, and disseminating lessons from the host unit
  • Monitoring lessons learned and other new knowledge from elsewhere, assessing it for relevance to the host unit, and “pushing” it to the correct people
  • Initiating actions that lead to change recommendations
  • Locally supporting the “Request for Information” process, where soldiers can make requests for information from the Centre for Army Lessons Learned.
In many of the support centres, the L2I analyst also has a role in developing doctrine, as described here

  • The L2I analyst can derive information from a variety of sources: unit after-action reports; tactics, techniques, and procedures used by units in and returning from theater; Soldier observations/submissions to the Engineer School; and requests for information. 
  • This information is used to conduct doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities gap analyses and to determine solutions

As ever, Industry can learn from the Military.

Too often we see “Lessons Learned systems” which seem to have no roles or accountabilities assigned to them. The assumption seems to be that “everyone is responsible for lessons learned”, which quickly becomes “someone else will do it”, then “nobody is responsible”. The Army avoid this by identifying specific pivotal roles for identification, communication and analysis of Lessons, and for identifying what needs to be done as a result.

If you want your Lessons Learned system to really work, then you may need roles similar to the L2I in your operation units.

View Original Source Here.

8 KM jobs in word-cloud format

Knowledge Management is such a fuzzy term that looking for a KM job is a minefield. One way to see what these jobs actually entail is to use a word cloud as a simple text analysis tool, and see which words leap out.

Here are 8 recent jobs posted on LinkedIn – all from the USA – where I have taken the role description section and cut and pasted the text into a word cloud generator. Lets see which words (apart from Knowledge, Management, and KM) stand out.
Job number 1 – above – strip out the “Knowledge” word (which mostly relates to the job title) and you can see that this is really a Content Management role
Job number 2 – above –  is a data management job
Job number 3 – above –  really doesnt have any stand-out give-away words. It probably is a bona fide well-rounded KM role, with aspects of collaboration, aspects of sharing, and aspects of content.
Job number 4 – above –  looks like a job for a project document manager
Job number 5 – above –  again doesn’t have any stand-out giveaways if we ignore “knowledge” and “management”. Its probably a good KM role, focused on self-service articles.
Job number 6 – above –  is a document management role
Job number 7 – above –  the biggest word (other than KM) is SharePoint, so we know what this is about!
Job number 8 – above –  again seems like a well rounded role, with no single issue taking precedence.
The word clouds are a quick way to see the main focus of the jobs, and we can see that a lot of KM jobs are focused on content management, data management, document management and records management. However there are some more varied and more comprehensive KM jobs in there as well.

View Original Source Here.

Skip to toolbar