In today`s knowledge-based economy, it is the intangible assets that differentiate a company in the marketplace. This creates a new set of issues, because the management of intangible assets requires different disciplines, tools and techniques to those used in the management of tangible assets.
In 1995, when IBM purchased Lotus for $3.5 billion, the book value of Lotus at that time was only half a billion dollars. In fact, when purchasing a company, we are only interested in that figure above the book value...the intangible assets, or the knowledge of the company...its knowledge capital. Consider the example of Dimension Data, which, prior to moving its primary listing from SA to London, had a net asset value below R2 billion with a market capitalisation in excess of R40 billion.
We have moved beyond answering questions such as "what is the difference between data, information and knowledge" and "what is knowledge management" to the stage where we all have the theoretical background to some extent, even if we don`t quite understand why there are so many different perspectives and views on the subject. A cynical view is that, because the discipline is still emerging, these perspectives and views are those of the various solution-providers, some of whom haven`t quite grasped the fundamentals, and have their own biased view in order to justify selling their own rebadged products and services.
Remember the Contact Management systems that became Customer Relationship Management systems, which in turn are becoming Enterprise Relationship Management systems, offering limited additional functionality? Knowledge Management faces a similar challenge - how did Workflow and Groupware, or Data Mining and Data Warehousing, or Corporate Intranets, Electronic Mail and Discussion Forums, suddenly become Knowledge Management overnight?
The answer is that, unlike the various software vendors and publishers would have us believe, Knowledge Management is not a system. Yes, people without technology don`t scale, but technology without people doesn`t work!
If Knowledge Management is more than a system, what are the constituent parts? I can think of no better place to look for guidance than the Gartner Group.
The April 2000 Gartner Group Report "The Knowledge Management Scenario : Trends and Directions for 1999 - 2004" forecasts that by 2001, enterprises that lack ongoing KM initiatives will lag KM-enabled competitors by between 30% and 40% in speed of deployment.
Key trends identified were:
- By 2003 more than half of Fortune 1000 companies will implement KM, and KM will be a mainstream business management practise among market leaders in all industries
- Successful KM integrates people (culture), process and technology frameworks
- KM is enterprise-wide in scope, yet user-centric in application
Critical Success Factors identified:
- KM must be linked to, and aligned with, the enterprise`s strategic direction
- KM requires a culture of knowledge sharing and collaboration
- KM must be enabled by robust human and business processes
- KM depends on a compelling technology environment to automate the processes
- Cultural change requires 50% - 70% of the overall KM implementation effort
Gartner feels that no single vendor will offer a complete, holistic KM solution by the end of this year. Is this true? Is there anyone out there who can help? Is there anyone who can cut through the hype? We`ll explore this more fully in the weeks to come.
Share
Editorial contacts