Yeah, as the post says I’m starting to see knowledge retention more as a by product of networking rather than a one-off program.

If knowledge flows it will be retained.

We just aren’t computers - I can’t dump what I know before I walk out the door like a computer can. People are organic, emotional and complex…we need triggers, patterns, contexts, etc.

I like what you allude to in that KM and networks are very much needed in this climate as knowledge is walking out the door.

We can’t just focus our efforts on efficiency, cause it’s not long term. It’s not gonna help you when someone leaves, which could cause major disruption in leaving a hole, which may be detrimental to your bottom-line whether you are an efficient company or not.

Thx for visiting.

Not smooth sailing, hey.

I agree, we need reflection into our processes
- I see Nancy Dixon, Patrick Lambe and Shawn Callahan talk about how knowledge and collaboration should be treated as seriously components to teams.
http://www.greenchameleon.com/gc/blog_detail/knowedge_enabled_project_management/
http://www.commonknowledge.org/userimages/article_asking_problem.pdf
http://www.anecdote.com.au/archives/2008/02/developing_a_co.html

Google’s 20% personal project work thing may cost some time that could have been spent churning out widgets, but an innovation out of this could pay for all those widgets, or a whole new way to churn them out, and then some.

I think the biggest thing to tackle in the next 5 years is a post by Gia Lyons
http://giatalks.com/blog/individual-measurements-in-a-social-world-adoption-obstacle/

- will how well I use my network to tap into talent to produce that report be recognised, compared to just using my team resources?

- will sourcing my networks for help (collaboration), reduce the measure of assets I produce, if so I will produce something of less value on my own, at least I get all the credit and a bag of carrots.

Job evaluations need a group ROI, or how well you collaborate measure…because if you are collaborating you are tapping into the resource pool to potentially produce better work, as you are not as smart as many people together

If senior management want effectiveness and knowledge sharing they need to walk the walk, and allow time for people to build networks and network.

I’ve got a post in the works on this…

Related to your comment is a post I did on ambient awareness.
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/12/15/as-it-happens-culture/

On Facebook we are participating and connecting, the news feed allows us to be constantly aware of what our network is up to (what they are doing, commenting on, being commented on).

For the new generation, and savvy older generations, gone are the days of waiting for a letter…we are always on.

http://chieftech.blogspot.com/2008/08/value-of-social-networking-now-just.html

I assume with the younger generations coming in that we will not be as worried about knowledge retention so much, as participation will be part of how they work

The situation of transient workers will never go, only it won’t be as full on as a baby boomer drain…that said the younger generation tend to jump from job to job more than previous generations, so knowledge retention is still a priority…but since they participate online and feel connected, it will not be an issue as much that we have to directly tackle.

I think this is true (altho that future may indeed be a distant one) with one big exception. Most organisations are really bad at building in opportunities for reflection into their work processes. We get the job done but we rarely consider how we could do it better in the future. We may find ways of incorporating this into people’s workpatterns but learning is not always easy and nor should it be.

I’m sure social computing will make this learning process easier but it can never make it painless.