–

Hemangi Vyas wrote:
That strategizing is very important and is the first step towards building up the KM process is not understood. I found it totally absent or not strictly followed in some companies.Considering that KM as a concept was first initiated in such firms i found that surprising. Thanks for sharing the article.

–

Daryl McCracken wrote:
Knowledge Maps have been a key component of, and success factor in the development of our companies communities of practice. From the business side, it encourages a structured exploration of the information which needs to be created or gathered. And from the technical side it greatly improves the ability for developers to understand the scope of effort, to plan architecture and to more rapidly deliver web-based solutions.

–

John Maloney wrote:
Hi — Knowledge mapping is not recommended. KM is definitely not a process or a “web-based solution.” (Hunh?) It is disappointing to see these questions and remarks. It is 2009 folks!

“…it tells you where knowledge resides…” What? Knowledge is not a resident. Knowledge is a dynamic flow. Knowledge inhabits networks.

Data and information are modeled and mapped. It is important, but it is not KM. Please. It is information management, library science, data base admin and document control. Calling this KM is the origin of all the KM problems.

Knowledge is social. Knowledge creates value and wealth. To visualize and optimize knowledge you must examine the value networks. That’s all. All the ‘web based solutions,’ document libraries, and processes (?), will take care of themselves.

KM is a complex adaptive system. It cannot be controled or ‘processed.’ It can only be served. To understand and improve knowledge, do not waste time and resources on information administration, visualize value. More here…

http://valuenetworks.com/public/blog/217181

-j

–

Nick Milton wrote:

I agree with John that what Aleksander is suggesting is information mapping.

An alternative approach is to map out the business-led knowledge needs. Ask the question “what knowledge do we need to deliver our business strategy and goals”? Then ask – “do we have access to this knowledge? If not, how do we gain it?”

This demand-side mapping is in my opinion more powerful than supply-side information mapping.

HTH

Nick Milton

–

Naina Visani wrote:
I am not sure that I totally agree. I agree that the mapping processes do map what is explicit and in this case information. But it can used to map the people or team who do actually hold the knowledge and what that knowledge topic might be. Such a map can be used to identify the experts within a company but we also use this to map out our knowledge domains or capabilities within our organisation so that we can track the health of this (by identifying indivuals or team sizes) to ensure we deliver against our strategic objectives. So mapping knowledge is possible and is not always just about identifying information.

Naina
–

Alastair Stewart wrote:

I agree with Naina; you can map knowledge, and it’s useful to do so in two ways:

1) A knowledge structure map can show you the knowledge tree required to do certain tasks, i.e. just what you need to know to carry out a task, and how it is built up from other knowledge. These maps can show you the robustness of the knowledge within your organisation – e.g. how many people know a particular critical topic.

2) A knowledge flow map can show you who has knowledge, who needs it and the mechanisms used to transfer it between them. These maps can show you how effectively knowledge moves around your organisation – e.g. is B out of the knowledge transfer loop between A and C, and does it matter?

Regards,

Alastair

–

I think it essential that at the project level knowledge AND skills mapping takes place. I have often found that the project team is not aware of the knowledge they have, the knowledge they need nor the skills within the team. Getting this right would make a real difference and delivery of project just a little easier.

Ron Rosenhead

Excellent article. Knowledge maps have several applications and can be very useful in project management as well as in strategic planning. Knowledge maps also help identify experts and go to persons on a project, which is especially useful in a post merger scenario. They help reduce the level of effort and time spent on finding the right person to answer a question, which can be considerable (around 30%).
Murali, you can build relationships into a knowledge map. I use knowledge flows and interactions in my maps.

I do understand the draw backs of applying knowledge maps to projects when you look at knowledge as a stock.

While Flows and relationships do not help you directly reduce knowledge gaps they do provide you with information that can help you do so.

As I’m sure you know there is no formula you can apply to get the results you want. Each approach only gives you information that you need to put together in a manner you see fit.

Regards
Murali

Appreciate the comment and the examples.

Arjun

Nice post and one I entirely agree with. Mapping knowledge in an organisation can b very enlightening. Take a look at this link http://www.durantlaw.info/Visualisations for some real examples.

Best Regards
Graham