<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Comments on Making Knowledge Management Work on your Intranet</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/making_knowledge_management_work_on_your_intranet</link>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:51:57 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>In the information economy, the longevity of an organization is based as much on the sophistication of its knowledge management practices as it is on traditional differentiators such as the strength of its products, the talent of its employees, and its marketplace reputation and partner relationships. Simply speaking, as actionable and insightful information becomes the currency of an organization, there are few other ways to tap into any latent potential lost in the office corridors.</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the feedback Xavier. You&amp;#8217;re right, the people element is by far the hardest to manage. In this introductory article, I barely address the challenges related to encouraging people to participate in KM efforts.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/making_knowledge_management_work_on_your_intranet#content_2001</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/making_knowledge_management_work_on_your_intranet#content_2001</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:51:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Shiv</author>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Great article, Shiv!  Lots of good comments.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;The point about &amp;#8220;no one-size-fits-all/no single technology&amp;#8221; is crucial &amp;#8211; KM is a combination of business objectives, process, culture, organizational development, technology, etc&amp;#8230;  I consider the &amp;#8220;people&amp;#8221; piece of it as (a lot) harder than the technology or business piece.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;You can also look at KM systems in terms of how well they support tacit (in your head) vs. explicit (in a tangible form such as documents) knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;Tacit knowledge can be supported by encouraging open and collaborative (though perhaps less structured) forums such as mailing lists, threaded discussions, and communities where you can find subject matter experts.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;Explicit knowledge can be much more scalable in terms of how it can be shared and leveraged across the organization.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;So I think that KM in an organization should support tacit knowledge sharing, but the chief aim should be to continuously encourage the people to share their knowledge explicitly.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/making_knowledge_management_work_on_your_intranet#content_2000</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/making_knowledge_management_work_on_your_intranet#content_2000</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:51:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Xavier Fan</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
