KMKM andand Libraries:Libraries:Experiences elsewhereExperiences elsewhere

Nongyao PremkamolnetrNongyao Premkamolnetr

Policy Innovation CenterPolicy Innovation CenterKing Mongkut’s University of Technology ThonburiKing Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi

nongyao.pre@kmutt.ac.thnongyao.pre@kmutt.ac.th26 October 200526 October 2005

TopicsTopics• KM-related information :- tools & techniques,

technology / applications• KM and library activities

– Reference services– Special collection:-Grey literature– As KM centers for SME– As gateway to KM resources

• Libraries as KM partners with the universities• KM Success indicators• KM failure factors

Tool & technique used in KMTool & technique used in KM• After Action Review (AAR)• Community of Practice (CoP) • Connection• Exit interviews• Identifying and sharing best practice• Knowledge center• Knowledge harvesting• Peer assists• Social network analysis• Storytelling• White pages

Source: http://www.nelh.nhs.uk/knowledge_management/km2/toolkit.asp

Communities of Practice (CoP)Communities of Practice (CoP)

“groups informally bound together by shared expertise & passion for a joint enterprise”

- Etienne Wenger

“peers in the execution of real work. What holds them together is a common sense of purpose and a real need to know what each other knows”

- John Seely Brown

Communities of PracticeCommunities of Practice (CoP)(CoP)• Why CoP?

– ..for a professional, it is essential to belong to a CoP because it is very difficult to know every thing .. (Wenger & Jean, 1991)

• Different names:-– Learning communities (HP)– Family Group (Xerox)– Thematic groups (World bank)– Peers groups (British Petroleum)– Knowledge network (IBM)

• Virtual CoP :- discussion lists, forums, shared glossaries, repositories of reference documents, chat rooms, video & audio-based communication facilities

Benefits of CoPBenefits of CoP Share best practices, avoid bad practices:

codifying experience

Solve problems more efficiently: knowing who and how to ask

Build member skills: peer learning

Innovate – vetting and nurturing new ideas

CoP Building BlocksCoP Building Blocks

Community Leader/Facilitator Meetings – F2F, VC, Phone Community Website Knowledge Base Help Desk Newsletters, dissemination strategy Partnerships/Joint Ownership

Source: Ronald Kim, 2005Source: Ronald Kim, 2005

Success Factors in Building a CoPSuccess Factors in Building a CoP• Focus on topics important to the business of

community members.• Find a well-respected community member to

coordinate the community.• Make sure people have time and

encouragement to participate.• Get key resource persons involved.• Build personal relationships among members.• Develop an active and passionate core group.• Create forums for thinking together as well as

systems for sharing information.

Source: Ronald Kim, 2005Source: Ronald Kim, 2005

Success Factors in Building a CoP Success Factors in Building a CoP (cont.)(cont.)

• Make it easy to contribute and access the community’s knowledge and practice.

• Create real dialogue about cutting edge issues.• Reliable technological platform• Recognition of the participation of the members• Clear statement of benefits found in

participating in the community

Source: Source: Hernandes, 2003, Ronald Kim, 2005Ronald Kim, 2005

KM technologies/applicationsKM technologies/applications

KM and Library Activities :KM and Library Activities :Reference servicesReference services

• Ref. librarians answer thousands of questions every day• In the process of helping users locate relevant inf.,

librarians have amassed enormous of tacit knowledge about print & electronic resources.

• “The next best thing to knowing something is knowing where and how to find it - just in time”

• No single librarian can keep track of or remember the best sources of inf. for all the questions asked

• They manage to answer only 50-60 % correctly• Therefore they need to improve services and learn from

each other by sharing correct answers

KM and Library Activities :KM and Library Activities :Reference servicesReference services

• Knowledge transfer– Work with co-workers (tacit 2 tacit)– Provide answer through email, workshop,

conferences, printed and web-based guide, publication, informal conversation (tacit 2 explicit)

– Use new technology to yield more creative method :- using web Blogs into knowledge based as part of the knowledge sharing strategy

– Reference librarians need to formalize their tacit knowledge, non-codified explicit knowledge ready reference files, FAQ

KM and Library Activities :KM and Library Activities :Reference servicesReference services

• Frequent asked question card files– All materials that were found with difficulty– References to questions asked frequently– Information or items not easily located

through indexes– Any info. that likely to be needed in the future

but would be at a loss to find again– Info. of local interest and queries that couldn’t

be answered despite a thorough search

KM and Library Activities :KM and Library Activities :Reference servicesReference services

• Knowledge-based expert system fact type questions– The National Agricultural Library developed a “computerised

expert system” to assist users in obtaining answers to questions on agricultural topics

• Knowledge repositories:-– Contain FAQ, info. & resources for class assignment, important

policies & procedures, emails, addresses, phone no.& urls. of frequent used resources

– Web-based Ready Ref. Database (RRD) at San Diego State Univ.

• Electronic Listserv’s, Usenet newsgroup, and collaborative reference:- QuestionPoint, Stumpers

KM and Library Activities : Reference KM and Library Activities : Reference services : San Diego State Univ.: RRDservices : San Diego State Univ.: RRD

• Is both knowledge repository and a knowledge map

• It contains knowledge (a repository), but it also point to knowledge (a knowledge map)

• Knowledge map often point to both people and documents which are guides that help to locate important info. in the organistion

• A related process in knowledge creation is “knowledge linking’ where info. created by other org. linking to relevant web sites, embeded info. drawn from outside sources and referrals to outside experts

http://www.questionpoint.org/index.html

http://domin.dom.edu/depts/gslis/stumpers/

Special collection: Grey literatureSpecial collection: Grey literature• 6 civil- and hydraulic- engineering institutes form

Delft Cluster in the Netherlands• Develop collaboration to increase the efficiency of

research program• Knowledge map technique is used to encourage

professionals to share info. on people, projects, organisations and tools in their working field.

• Knoweldge map answer questions – Who worked on a similar problem before?– There must be a tool for this problem, but where?

• Grey literature would be collected, stored, disseminated in a database

Special collection: Grey literatureSpecial collection: Grey literature• Knowledge map/grey literature system was built• The project team and the project leadership were shared

from 2 institutes• Aims to improve access to implicit knowledge• Strategy was to strengthen the informal networks by

improving codification and diffusion of this knowledge• Selected subject was “Tunnel construction in soft soil”• The 10-month project called “Delft Cluster Tunnel

Center” has been developed for the researchers, consultants and engineers

• The project tried to give answer to 2 questions:– Is access to knowledge improve?– Are the informal networks more opens? (consultants and

scientists and contractors)

Special collection: Grey literature Special collection: Grey literature Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

• The info. need of each group seem to differ more than first realised

• Communication with potential end users should have been better

• Not plan in enough time for consulation of management and end users

• Testing took a lot of time• Should have more time in discussions with

software supplier during the development• Loading of content should have been organised

better

Library as KM centersLibrary as KM centers (LKMC)(LKMC)

• Proposes enhancing libraries as KM centers for SME – KM and competitive intelligence

• Use semantic web in the LKMC– XML– URIs– RDF– Ontologies– Intelligent agents

• Documents can be annotated in such a way that their semantic content will be optimally accessible and comprehensible to automated software agents and other computerized tools that function without human guidance

Develop a gateway to KM-related Develop a gateway to KM-related issueissue

• National Library for Health (NLH)

http://www.nelh.nhs.uk/knowledge_management/default.asp

http://www.nelh.nhs.uk/knowledge_management/default.asp

KM partner with the universityKM partner with the university

• Knowledge process:-– Generative : create new knowledge and lead

to the production of innovations– Productive– Representative

• Library as an internal strategic partner

Source: Huotari, M-L, 2005

Source: Huotari & Livonen, 2005

KM successKM success IndicatorsIndicators

• Growth in the resources including people and budget

• Growth in the volume of content and usage• The project is a organisational initiative, not

individual effort• Evidence of financial return

Source: Davenport, 1998.

KM Failure FactorsKM Failure Factors• Technology : connectivity, usability, maintenance

cost• The focus was on the technology rather than the

business and its people.• Culture : politics, knowledge sharing, perceived

image, management commitment• Content :coverage, structure, relevance &

currency, knowledge distillation• Project management : user involvement, technical

& business expertise, conflict management, rollout strategy, project cost, project evaluation, involvement of external consultants

KM Failure factors (cont.)KM Failure factors (cont.)• KM was not tied into business processes and ways of

working. It was seen as another laborious overhead activity or yet another new initiative.

• Most knowledge management literature was very conceptual and lacking in practical advice, which led to frustration at the inability to translate the theory into practice - 'it all makes so much sense but why isn't it working?'.

• A lack of incentives - employees quite rightly asked the 'what's in it for me?' question.

• There wasn't sufficient senior executive level buy in.

.

Further readingsFurther readings• Chua, A & Lam, W., 2005, “Why KM projects fail: a multi-case

analysis”, J Knowledge management, 9, 3, p6-17.• Gandhi, S., 2004, “Knowledge management and reference services”, J

Academic librarianship, July.• Hernandes, C A & Fresneda, P S., 2003, “Main critical success factors

for the establishment and operation of virtual communities of practice”, 3rd European knowledge management summer school.

• Huotari, M-L, 2005, “Knowledge process: a strategic foundation for the partnership between the university and its library” Library management, 26, 6/7, p324-335.

• Koenig, M E D., 2003, “Knowledge management, user education and librarianship” Library review, 52, 1, p10-17.

• Parker, K R et al, 2005, “Libraries as knowledge management centers”, Library management, 26, 45, p176-189.

• Van den Berg, C. & Popescu, I., 2005, “An experience in knowledge mapping”, J knowledge management, 9,2, p123-128.