The smarter enterprise — Online Collaboration

One more intruiging question. Has online collaboration make u, ur collegaes  and your team smarter. What about your competitors outside and inside your enterprise.

Found at The smarter enterprise — Online Collaboration.

Enterprises spend $270 billion on software every year, yet some can’t even calculate the number of employees in their organizations. Shocking?

Read all at The smarter enterprise — Online Collaboration.

Enhanced by Zemanta
About these ads

So We Adapt. What’s the Downside? — HBS Working Knowledge

Found at So We Adapt. What’s the Downside? — HBS Working Knowledge.

Adaptability is a current byword in a world filled with uncertainty at all levels, including that of the individual. We adapt by listening to and heeding customers. We adapt by delegating authority, often to teams operating at the lowest levels of the organization

Read all at So We Adapt. What’s the Downside? — HBS Working Knowledge.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Collaboration and Competition

Regular readers know that i believe in collaboration, but – being a biker – please note that everyone benefits if there is a productive tension.

Found at Collaboration and Competition.

Although most of us wouldn’t hesitate to admit that collaborationimplies some kind of competition for most employees and teams, understanding how collaboration works as an organized distributed task chain is a good strategy and approach to collaboration implementation that will prevent our employees to compete among them

Read all at Collaboration and Competitio

Enhanced by Zemanta

Green Chameleon » Trends in Knowledge Management

Found at Green Chameleon » Trends in Knowledge Management.

raditionally, KM was more often than not a top-down driven approach. For example, document taxonomies and knowledge sharing procedures were defined; identified experts shared their knowledge in defined communities.

Today, we can identify six strong trends that lead into new concepts of knowledge sharing and collaboration:

People are inherently curious for more based on their interest: a) Social media allows us to discover new content which is shared by our peers, friends, etc. b) Social computing empowers people to access information that is related to their interests and scope of work. These services support employees gain faster a deeper and broader expertise complementing classic (expensive) training. This open doors to informal and contextual learning; a more costs effective training.

To be continued at


Show Me a Bike: Leighton Meester on Wheels

Enhanced by Zemanta

Recommended: Duperrin’s Link for this week (at last someone gets 21st century knowledge sharing)

Knowledge Flows
Image by Choconancy1 via Flickr

Recommended: Links for this week (weekly) – Hayes Knight: at last someone gets 21st century knowledge sharing “…

Working in a knowledge intensive enviroment as a contact center, I really have to admit. That in that discipline – at least in the Netherlands – we do not acknowledge the fact that our customers have access to Google, can surf any 1.0 website and are becoming more and more social.

Photocredit: jeremyhughes

Enhanced by Zemanta

Recommended Are All Employees Knowledge Workers? John Hagel III, John Seely Brown, and Lang Davison @ Harvard Business Review

Richard Florida, The Creative Class
Image by AlphachimpStudio via Flickr

Found at

We live in a world of haves and have nots. No, not the kind you might imagine. These people reside within our companies. We increasingly group the people in our firms into two classes: those who have knowledge and talent and, by implication, those who do not. This segmentation is misleading and damaging to firms in the long run.

Ask executives to identify the talent within their firm and many will focus on the top tiers of management. Often, they will include in this august group the “high potentials” being groomed for leadership roles. Sometimes, they will extend the boundaries to include “creative talent” or “knowledge workers“. But then there is the rest of the workforce.

When talking about talent, many executives focus on what Richard Florida calls the “creative class”: engineers, scientists, architects, educators, researchers, coders, artists and, more broadly, knowledge workers.

To be continued at

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Recommended: KM 3.0 part II: The value of knowledge

Swedish girl 2
Image by jacquelinekothbauer via Flickr

Found at KM 3.0 part II: The value of knowledge.

One of the major recurring themes this month will be knowledge management.

In the beginning of  februari  I introduced the concept KM 3.0 as outlined by Atle Iversen.

Last week  Atle Iversen answered the question what is knowledge management.


From chapter I: What is knowledge:
Expertise acquired by a person through experience or education

Has this knowledge any value if it is not used by anyone ? Does the value increase or decrease when we share it with others ? And what kind of knowledge should be shared with others to help people get their job done ?

This depends on several factors, the most important being
- Value (worth vs. cost)
- Scope (e.g., organization, department, project, personal)
- Expiration time (short vs. long term, static vs. dynamic)

Collecting and sharing knowledge will also affect
- initial cost
- maintenance cost
- information overload
- findability/searchability

If you want to collect knowledge from a project, someone needs to write down the knowledge in a format that is understandable, and in a place that is searchable/findable. This will take some time, and therefore has an initial cost (e.g., 3 hours at $50 an hour = $150).

To be continued

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


laos luang prabang, jeune fille lors d'une fet...
Image via Wikipedia


Found at

Researcher, MIT Mind Machine Project


Filtering, not remembering, is the most important skill for those who use the Internet. The Internet immerses us in a milieu of information — not for almost 20 years has a Web user read every available page — and there’s more each minute: Twitter alone processes hundreds of tweets every second, from all around the world, all visible for anyone, anywhere, who cares to see. Of course, the majority of this information is worthless to the majority of people. Yet anything we care to know — what’s the function for opening files in Perl? how far is it from Hong Kong to London? what’s a power law? — is out there somewhere.

I see today’s Internet as having three primary, broad consequences: 1) information is no longer stored and retrieved by people, but is managed externally, by the Internet, 2) it is increasingly challenging and important for people to maintain their focus in a world where distractions are available anywhere, and 3) the Internet enables us to talk to and hear from people around the world effortlessly.

Before the Internet, most professional occupations required a large body of knowledge, accumulated over years or even decades of experience. But now, anyone with good critical thinking skills and the ability to focus on the important information can retrieve it on demand from the Internet, rather than her own memory. On the other hand, those with wandering minds, who might once have been able to focus by isolating themselves with their work, now often cannot work without the Internet, which simultaneously furnishes a panoply of unrelated information — whether about their friends’ doings, celebrity news, limericks, or millions of other sources of distraction. The bottom line is that how well an employee can focus might now be more important than how knowledgeable he is. Knowledge was once an internal property of a person, and focus on the task at hand could be imposed externally, but with the Internet, knowledge can be supplied externally, but focus must be forced internally.

Separable from the intertwined issues of knowledge and focus is the irrelevance of geography in the Internet age. On the transmitting end, the Internet allows many types of professionals to work in any location — from their home in Long Island, from their condo in Miami, in an airport in Chicago, or even in flight on some airlines — wherever there’s an Internet connection. On the receiving end, it allows for an Internet user to access content produced anywhere in the world with equal ease. The Internet also enables groups of people to assemble based on interest, rather than on geography — collaboration can take place between people in Edinburgh, Los Angeles, and Perth nearly as easily as if they lived in neighboring cities.

In the future, these trends will continue, with the development of increasingly subconscious interfaces. Already, making an Internet search is something many people do without thinking about it, like making coffee or driving a car. Within the next 50 years, I expect the development of direct neural links, making the data that’s available at our fingertips today available at our synapses in the future, and making virtual reality actually feel more real than traditional sensory perception. Information and experience could be exchanged between our brains and the network without any conscious action. And at some point, knowledge may be so external, all knowledge and experience will be shared universally, and the only notion of an “individual” will be a particular focus — a point in the vast network that concerns itself only with a specific subset of the information available.

In this future, knowledge will be fully outside the individual, focus will be fully inside, and everybody’s selves will truly be spread everywhere.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]