Mopsos

I have had may discussions about how hard it is to get a complex message across to decision-makers when you only can get five minutes of their time (sounds familiar?). To me this is probably the most important hurdle of modern management, and even more now as the young generations have the same behavioral patterns. it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain somebody's attention for more than ten minutes.

Through Molly Wood's buzz report, I found the amazing "large hadron rap" by Alpinekat, and it struck a chord. I already knew that part of the answer is indeed to use the tricks of the attention-grabing industry of entertainment. I just didn't realize that it could be applied to hadron collision, nuclear waste or even IFRS accounting.

And Alpinekat did a great teaching job.

A new Forrester report predicts that enterprise spending on Web 2.0 technologies is going to increase dramatically. Over the next five years, that expenditure will grow at a compound annual rate of 43% This increase will include more spending on social networking tools, mashups, and RSS, with the end result being a market of $4.6 billion by the year 2013. Social networking tools will come as the first applications

So it looks like the time has finally come, five year later than what I anticipated. But will I have the guts to start a company again? In the US, probably, bu in France?

In a Harvard Business publication Tom Davenport argues that E2.0 is the new expression for KM. This is good news for my book, until some other guru invents a new expression, when we get tired of E 2.0. Let's imagine what it could be...

Excellent post on Library Clips about the reason why KM 1.0 has by and large failed to deliver and what KM 2.0 is about.

The traditional approach to KM, dubbed KM 1.0, is about "deploying" specific knowledge sharing tools to be used for extra "above-the-flow" tasks of capturing and sharing knowledge in the form of structured content. Since those tools are usually quite cumbersome to use, and are justified by potential reuse of content by others in the future, their use is mainly enforced by a culture of recognition and rewards for those who share, and/or sticks for those who don't.

Another approach, dubbed KM 2.0, and which could be called "in-the-flow" KM, is more "a way to do your work, and by default you have shared knowledge at the same time, without it having to be an explicit task". It aims at replacing e-mail and phone, not libraries, and it is enforced by a culture of experimentation of advanced technologies on practical cases.

Indeed, our enterprise discussions to promote KM should always navigate between these two extreme scenarios:

• devising knowledge sharing incentives to overcome the burden of cumbersome legacy KM technology,


• making KM transparent by hiding it behind existing business processes through leading edge technology,

In the last KMWorld White Paper, there is a great article by Nav Chakravarti of InQuira outlining the difference between a knowledge management system and a content management system.

"Instead of the more static create/manage/publish flow that embodies most CMS, organizations need to embrace a more fluid capture/route/convert workflow

• Capture effectiveness: Tracking contributions by author as well as the value of those contributions


• Route efficiencies: : Measuring time in the workflow, speed of updates, time spent on connection


• Conversion success: Feedback from users and customers, ratings, comments