Recently I caught the online version of colleaue Patrick Lambe's assessment of KM in Singapore. There are some interesting details presented, but on reflection, I find myself uncomfortable with some elements.
One is the conclusion that there is something wrong if people working in KM move out of KM in future posts instead of moving on within a KM role. There are so many variables that play into career transitions and the role of specialist domains that I dare not comment on the specific talk--as I say, it was interesting. However, from my own background in both records management and knowledge management, with senior management experience and a strong belief in attaining one's best possible career opportunity, I do have an opinion.
If we truly focus on what these domains are about, then we should encourage those who gain knowledge to take taht with them up the corporate ladder. I would far rather see a knowledge manager move into a senior role taking KM experience and sensibility into a more influential role. It means far less to be a CKO with a function that seems removed from corporate outcomes than it does to be a CEO who understands the value of knowledge resource development, n'est ce pas?
Personal soveriegnty
In a cross-thread dialogue now occurring in the Personal Soveriengty and Thinking People channels on Ryze, I felt compelled to raise the specter of our individual responsibility within organisations--be these governmental or not--within the context of a discussion of health care with some US net-connections.
Here's the post edited to make sense here. Your thoughts?
"In my view, every organisation is made up of people. Government and business alike are made up of people. We act consciously and rightly, as individuals, or not. In business, or in government.
My career has spanned public, private and not-for-profit sectors with both work and leadership positions in each. The much touted corporate agenda is an agenda of people in collusion. The subtle allusion to careerism in bureaucracy is similarly all about people in collusion. Each for their own self interest in dysfunctional contexts in which they believe that this is the way to gain self interest, excused by belief that the process is noble in itself or contributes something to a greater good.
IMHO (mabe not so 'h'), it is all about creating cultures of personal sovereignty (thanks James) in which we group together to deliver outcomes. Outcomes have been lost...A does her 15 steps, B does his 11, C does another 14 each satisfied to be "right" in their process, never mind that the sum total does not add up to what the process is ostensibly FOR.
This is about leadership and management; it is equally about individual responsibility. There's a lot of discussion of the limits to choice that arise from personal circumstances. These are valid matters. But that does not mean that a pragmatic choice to keep one's mouth shut does not have consequences. When we choose self interest (whether that be for greed or survival) at the expense of integrity, we take a step down the road that has led us to today.
IMO, fixing this challenges us at all levels. As a boss, I must sincerely welcome the challenge of a team member whose motivation is sincere, even if s/he lacks the bigger picture. n fact, i must willingly share that bigger picture to a larger extent than is currently the norm. (Just as the team member must understand that information shared has value and must be handled appropriately.) As a teacher, i must sincerely be open to questioning my own learning in the face of the teenager questioning injustices in the world--in the school. As a student, I must be open to the idea that there is more to most issues than I can possibly know given a short life experience. As a parent, I must celebrate the disagreement of a child thinking for her/himself. As a child, I must speak up and notice a parent who listens.
At every level we are challenged, or should be. But I believe that we have created structures that teach us quite the opposite. It is not that government is good/bad or that business is good/bad. There is good/bad in each. And that derives from us.
What do we do about that?
Here's the post edited to make sense here. Your thoughts?
"In my view, every organisation is made up of people. Government and business alike are made up of people. We act consciously and rightly, as individuals, or not. In business, or in government.
My career has spanned public, private and not-for-profit sectors with both work and leadership positions in each. The much touted corporate agenda is an agenda of people in collusion. The subtle allusion to careerism in bureaucracy is similarly all about people in collusion. Each for their own self interest in dysfunctional contexts in which they believe that this is the way to gain self interest, excused by belief that the process is noble in itself or contributes something to a greater good.
IMHO (mabe not so 'h'), it is all about creating cultures of personal sovereignty (thanks James) in which we group together to deliver outcomes. Outcomes have been lost...A does her 15 steps, B does his 11, C does another 14 each satisfied to be "right" in their process, never mind that the sum total does not add up to what the process is ostensibly FOR.
This is about leadership and management; it is equally about individual responsibility. There's a lot of discussion of the limits to choice that arise from personal circumstances. These are valid matters. But that does not mean that a pragmatic choice to keep one's mouth shut does not have consequences. When we choose self interest (whether that be for greed or survival) at the expense of integrity, we take a step down the road that has led us to today.
IMO, fixing this challenges us at all levels. As a boss, I must sincerely welcome the challenge of a team member whose motivation is sincere, even if s/he lacks the bigger picture. n fact, i must willingly share that bigger picture to a larger extent than is currently the norm. (Just as the team member must understand that information shared has value and must be handled appropriately.) As a teacher, i must sincerely be open to questioning my own learning in the face of the teenager questioning injustices in the world--in the school. As a student, I must be open to the idea that there is more to most issues than I can possibly know given a short life experience. As a parent, I must celebrate the disagreement of a child thinking for her/himself. As a child, I must speak up and notice a parent who listens.
At every level we are challenged, or should be. But I believe that we have created structures that teach us quite the opposite. It is not that government is good/bad or that business is good/bad. There is good/bad in each. And that derives from us.
What do we do about that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
