Enterprise Knowledge Management for Intelligence, Defense, and Homeland Security (Oct 2010)

1. Enterprise Knowledge Management for Intelligence, Defense, and Homeland Security (Oct 2010) Dave Lush, Senior SME Aha! Analytics

2. Contents • Purpose • References • The Short Form of the Briefing • Background • Key Observations • KM Definitions/Concepts (taken from): • Nonaka and Takeuchi • Knowledge Mgt Consortium International (KMCI) • Fraunhofer Institute • Infosys • Siemens • How KM Is Suboptimal • What To Do? • Summary/Conclusions

3. Purpose(s) To communicate some ideas/concepts regarding enterprise knowledge management and the way ahead for Intelligence, Defense, and Homeland Security

4. References • Books: • Fifth Discipline, Senge, 1990 • The Knowledge Creating Company, Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995 • Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity, Holland, 1996 • Knowledge Assets, Boisot, 1998 • Enabling Knowledge Creation, Krogh, Ichijo, Nonaka, 2000 • Knowledge Management Case Book, Davenport & Probst, 2002 • Knowledge Management: Concepts and Best Practices, Mertens, Heisig, Vorbeck, 2003 • The New Knowledge Management, McElroy, 2003 • Knowledge Leadership, Cavaleri and Seivert, 2005 • Ten Steps to Maturity in Knowledge Management, Suresh & Mahesh, 2006 • Internet Sources: • Knowledge Mgt Consortium International http://www.kmci.org/ • Knowledge Management Institute http://www.kminstitute.org/cms/index.jsp • KMWorld http://www.kmworld.com/ • BRINT KMNet http://km.brint.com/ • The Journal of KM Practice http://www.tlainc.com/jkmp.htm

5. Enterprise KMThe Short Form • People in an Organization Need to Know the Right Stuff at the Right Time In Order to Collectively Fulfill Their Roles and the Organization’s Mission • This Is the Usual Focus of Current Traditional KM and Can Be referred to As “Operational KM” or “Knowledge Operations” • People in an Organization and the Organization Itself Need to Learn and Create New Knowledge So As to Adapt and Innovate to Solve Problems and Accommodate Change • This Aspect Is Not Really Addressed in Traditional or “Old” Approaches to KM and So When Combined with the Traditional KM Is Called the “New KM” • People Come to Know Stuff Via Various Knowledge Assets and Knowledge Processes • Tacit, Implicit, and Explicit Assets • Creation, Internalization, Externalization, Socialization, Combination Processes • Knowledge Assets and Processes in a Given Organization Tend to Be Quite Suboptimal • Knowledge Management Has to Do With the Development/Deployment of Policies and Programs for the Organization’s Knowledge Processesand Assets Such That It Exhibits Excellent Performance, Adaptability, and Innovation • Enterprise Knowledge Management Requires: • Leadership Commitment • A Collaborative Learning Culture • A Conceptual Architecture/Framework • An Knowledge Assessment of the Enterprise • A Strategy and Plan • Appropriate Policies • Execution, Implementation, Deployment • Processes, Systems (e.g. Enterprise Knowledge Portal)/Tools, Competencies/Skills, Innovation • Sustainment, Adaptation, Continuous Improvement

6. Quick Background • Breath Taking Change! • Threat • Requirements • Technology • Complexity • Recognized Need for Info Sharing • Lots of Envisioning and Initiatives • Key Knowledge Mgt Requirements Still Not Being Addressed

7. So What Is Being Envisioned?(at the federal level) • National Information Sharing Strategy • DOD Information Sharing Strategy • DOD/DNI Joint Strategy • Lots of Very Senior Guys Are Saying the Right Things in Public

8. DOD Info Sharing Goals • (1) promote, encourage, and incentivize sharing; • (2) achieve an extended enterprise; • (3) strengthen agility in order to accommodate unanticipated partners and events; and • (4) ensure trust across organizations.

9. DOD/DNI Joint Vision • To establish an information services-based environment that is: • supported by a mandatory and common foundation based upon DoD CIO/DNI CIO jointly-developed standards, rules, and interoperable secure infrastructure services. This foundation will be governed by a joint board co-chaired by the DoD CIO and the DNI CIO; • Populated with secure mission and business services. These will be provided and used by functions and organizations from across the DoD and IC and based on applicable enterprise architectures; • Managed to ensure operational visibility and situational awareness of the information environment for users throughout the DoD and IC. • To achieve this shared vision, the DoD-DNI agreement outlines the shared goals adopted by the DoD and the IC to ensure the envisioned services-based environment is achieved. These goals include: • (1) provide services—rather than developing stand alone applications; • (2) use services—rather than creating duplicative capabilities; • (3) govern the environment; and • (4) manage the environment.

10. Touchstones of DOD Info Sharing

11. Features of a Fat, Dumb, and Happy Organization • Includes Very Intelligent People But Does Not Exhibit Features of an Intelligent Organization • Does Not Learn Well • Does Not Do What It Says It Is Going To Do • There Is a High Degree of Professional Narcissism and the Culture Is All About Individual Performance, Recognition, and Reward • The Organization Is Not Really Held Accountable for Its Overall Performance By Its Parent Organization; Members Including Leadership Are Not Really Concerned About Organizational Performance • Perceptions of How Well the Organization Is Doing Are Based On Anecdotal Events and Associated Impressions (e.g. General So and So Liked the Briefing he Received) • Competencies/Skills in Non-technical Areas Are Lacking • The Organization Does Not Have Good Organizational Memory and Is Unable to Make Requisite Connections As It Tries to Govern Itself • The Organization Is Not Very Aware of Its “Situation” or “Status” Including Its Internal Performance and Its Level of Customer Satisfaction • The Organization Has Immature Processes Even in Technical Domains; The Organization Repeatedly Does Stuff That It Has In Fact Done Before But It Still Does It As If It Were For the First Time • The Organization Has Difficulty Mobilizing Response to Non Standard Events • The Organization Is Parochial Having Various CoPs That Don’t Interact All That Much and the Organization Doesn’t Respect Many of Its Roles Particularly Those Involving Support • Innovation at Local Levels Rarely “Breaks Through” to Become a Wider Practice • Because the Organization’s People Are Self Described As “Smart” and There Are No Major Complaints From On High, They and Their Leaders Assume That the Organization Is Awesome • All the While The Organization Seriously Under Achieves

12. Key Observations • Meaningful, Effective, and EfficientSharing of Information and Knowledge Within and Across IC, DoD, and DHS COIs Is Not PossibleIf the Individual Members of the COIs Do Not Have Adequate Capabilities for Information/Knowledge Management! • An Organization and Its People Must Have Adequate Existing and Newly Created Knowledge Regarding: • Where It Is Going; • How It Is Going to Get There; • How Well the Trip Is Progressing; and • Lessons Learned, Problem Solutions, Improvement, Adaptation, Innovation • The Government’s Emphasis Appears to Be On Technology Driven Knowledge Sharing Which Is at the Core of the “Old KM”. This Is Good But Not the Whole Story! • A “New KM” Is Emerging • Emphasizes Knowledge Making (Creation) for Purposes of Adaptation and Innovation • Emphasizes KM in Context of Mission/Business Processes • There Are No Doubt Many Organizations in the Federal Government That Could Benefit From Enterprise KM Initiatives

13. Content of the Human Mind(Ackoff) • Data: symbols • Information: data that are processed to be useful; provides answers to "who", "what", "where", and "when" questions • Knowledge: application of data and information; answers "how" questions • Understanding: appreciation of "why“ • Wisdom: evaluated understanding. For purposes of our discussion we will employ a “wide” definition of “knowledge” to include information, knowledge, and understanding.

14. What’s Knowledge? Wisdom Wisdom: evaluated understanding. Understanding: appreciation of "why“ Knowledge: application of data and information; answers to “how” questions Information: data that are processed to be useful; provides answers to “who”, “what”, “where”, and “when” questions Data: symbols Understanding Knowledge Information Data

15. What Is Knowledge Management • Knowledge Management is the planned, systematic, managed implementation, facilitation, and execution of requisite vision, culture, relationships, and processes for the creation, capture, management,  transfer, and disposition of useful knowledge which enables • beneficial refinement of organizational intent and • increasing  organizational capability, responsiveness, performance, innovation, and growth.  • Knowledge Management Is Applied in Two Major Contexts i.e.: Sustainment/Survival and Innovation/Advancement • In the sustainment/survival context successfully executed Knowledge Management ensures that the right knowledge is internalized in the right heads and externalized/combined in the right processes so that people and processes “know” what they need to know In order to function properly if not optimally.  This is called by some pundits “knowledge integration”. • In the innovation/advancement context successfully executed Knowledge Management establishes a knowledge enabling culture conducive to the sharing and creation of tacit knowledge which propels organizational innovation. This is called by some pundits “knowledge making”.

16. When is KM Needed? (InfoSys)

17. Knowledge, States, Transfer, and Creation (Nonaka and Takeuchi) • Knowledge: Justified True Belief • States of Knowledge: • Internalized (inside the mind) • Implicit (in the mind but expressible) • Tacit (in the mind but not expressible) • Externalized or Codified (outside the mind) • Knowledge Conversion/Transfer (SECI Reference Model) • Externalization is defined as the process of articulating tacit knowledge into explicit concepts via such means as metaphor, analogy, hypotheses or models • Internalization is defined as the process of embodying explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge • Socialization: is defined as the process of transforming tacit knowledge in one mind into tacit knowledge in an another mind • Combination: is defined as the process of transforming externalized knowledge in one form into externalized knowledge of another form; this is very germane to so called machine to machine operations • Knowledge Creation (Five Interacting Phases): • Sharing Tacit and Implicit Knowledge • Creating Concepts • Justifying Concepts • Archetype Creation • Cross Leveling Concepts

18. socialization creation creation externalization internalization Externalized Knowledge Automated Process combination Externalized Knowledge externalization internalization creation creation socialization Knowledge Creation and Conversion(Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995)

19. Knowledge Creation (Nonaka and Takeuchi) New Knowledge for Innovation/Advancement • Sharing Implicit/Tacit Knowledge • Creating Concepts • Justifying Concepts • Building a Prototype • Cross Leveling Knowledge

20. Five-Phase Process Model for Organizational Knowledge Creation (Tanaka & Takeuchi) Combination Socialization Externalization Building An Archetype Justifying Concepts Creating Concepts Sharing Tacit Knowledge Cross Leveling Concepts Internalization Tacit Knowledge Explicit Knowledge Figure 5: Process Model for Organizational Knowledge Creation Knowledge Creation

21. Structure of Learning in Human Social Systems(KMCI) • Independent Individual Learning • Group or Community Learning • Communities of Knowledge • Communities of Communities • Organizational Adaptation • Integration of New Knowledge Into Practice

22. Critical Factors for Organizational Learning(KMCI) • Embryology of Knowledge (How Is Knowledge Created) • Politics of Knowledge (Who Is Authorized) • Intellectual Diversity (Group Think Vs Diversity of Thinking) • Connectedness (Richness of Connection and Communication)

23. Enabling Conditions for Knowledge Creation(Nonaka and Takeuchi) • Intent • Autonomy • Fluctuation and Creative Chaos • Redundancy • Requisite Variety

24. The New KM (KM Consortium International KMCI) • What distinguishes the KMCI point of view? • Its original, conceptual framework known as “Second-Generation KM” (aka, The New KM) • Its formulation of the “Knowledge Life Cycle” (KLC) • Its recognition of the importance of knowledge makingin a firm, not just knowledge sharing • Its focus on the links between KM, organizational learning, intellectual capital, and innovation • Its view of firms as ‘complex adaptive systems’ • Its revolutionary conception of ‘The Open Enterprise’ • Its applications of KM to Risk Management • Its treatment of Corporate Epistemology and KM • Its comprehensive KM methodology: K-STREAM™

25. Key Ideas & Related Reference Models(KMCI) • The New Knowledge Management’s 3-Tier Model • An Organizational CAS Network with Agents • Double-Loop Learning -Combining Argyris/Schön and Popper • Decision Execution Cycle • The Knowledge Life Cycle (KLC) • Unified Theory of Knowledge (‘Worlds’ 1, 2 and 3) • Organizational Knowledge: The Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base (DOKB) • Types of Mental Knowledge • TNKM Interagent Knowledge Conversion Model • New Perspective on the KM Function • Corporate Epistemology –The Epistemological Tree

41. Fraunhofer Institute Approach(KM Concepts and Best Practices) • The Fraunhofer Reference Model and Business Process Oriented KM • Fraunhofer Knowledge Management Audit • Motivation for KM • Role Models, Resources, and Strategy for KM • Knowledge Management Tools • Intellectual Capital: Measuring KM

42. Fraunhofer IPK KM Framework

43. Fraunhofer IPK KM Reference Model

44. Generic Activity Model for KM

45. Implementation Model

46. KM Audit • Objectives • Uncover Strengths and Weaknesses • Analyze Circumstances, Barriers, and Enablers • Increase Awareness • Roadmap for Future KM Initiatives • Monitoring/Measurment • Approaches • Knowledge Audit (Liebowitz) • KM Assessment Tool (KMAT) • KM Diagnostic (KMD) • Knowledge Audit (Pfeifer) • KM Maturity Model (KMMM)(Siemens) • The Fraunhofer KM Audit • Fraunhofer IPK Reference Model • Survey: Qualitative and Quantitative Parts

47. KM Audit Phases • Initial Preparation • Focus Setting • Customization to Organization • Survey (Interviews and Questionnaire) • Analysis Evaluation • Feedback Workshop • Project ID

48. Motivational Aspects (Fraunhofer) • Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation • Thesis of Normalization • Task Orientation • Barriers of Change • Motivation • Competency • Change Management • Change in Behavior • Change in Attitude • Factors of Acceptance • Sensitivity • Ability • Liability • Commitment • Areas of Intervention • Transparencies • Competencies • Leadership • Involvement

49. Roles, Resources, Strategy • Knowledge Is a Resource in Context of Fraunhofer Integrated Enterprise Model (IEM) • Strategic Orientation and KM Strategies • Single Loop Vs Double Loop Learning or Both • Knowledge Integration/Implementation Vs Definition/Creation or Both • Knowledge Definition vs Implementation • Resource vs Market Orientation • Exploiters Vs Explorers • Knowledge Sharing and Core Knowledge Processes • Codification Vs Personalization • On Individual Basis Implicit-Explicit-Implicit Process Not Nearly As Efficient As Implicit-Implicit • Codification For En-masse Transfer • Roles and Role Models • Role Model: Roles and Relationships • Strategic Roles, Operational Roles, Technical Roles

50. KM Tools(automate, enhance, and enable handling of the knowledge base and the generation, codification, and transfer of knowledge) • Knowledge Base • Knowledge Bearers And Knowledge Carriers • Process and Content • Structuring Knowledge • Semantic Net • Thesaurus • Topic Map • Taxonomy • Ontology • Fraunhofer Process for Structuring Data • Model the Relevant Business Processes • Specify User Requirements Derived From Business Processes • Identify Relevant Knowledge Objects and Metadata • Define/Specify Structure and Gain Consensus • Implement • Fraunhofer Tools • Process Assistant • Topic Map Engine • Knowledge Navigator