I’ve recently been participating in a discussion amongst KM leaders (SIKM Leaders group) about KM Maturity models. Various people offered their favorite model.
I spoke against the use of KM Maturity models because the approach assumes a two things that are very rare between two different organizations – let alone all organizations over all time:
- a common understanding of “knowledge”; and
- a shared business model.
In addition, changing what people know – the heart of any KM effort – is an extraordinarily complex undertaking. That is, “K” – and therefore “KM” – is highly contextualized and takes place within a complex system. So a simplistic A to B to C model simply doesn’t capture what is happening. And, therefore, there is no one path of “maturity”.
You are better off to start from an understanding of your own organization’s priorities and strategy – and look for the most effective ways to help influence who knows what based on examples you’ve seen or read about or from experts you work with.
I could not agree more. However, I suppose once an organization has a KM “Vision, mission and goals” it might be able to develop it’s own “maturity model” in the form of a “where we are now” to “where we want to be” gap analysis and the strategy for bridging the gap. At any given point in time during execution of that strategy, should the organization be able to benchmark itself against its goals, has it met it’s KM KPI’s for the period ?
Does that really constitute an internal maturity model ? What do you think Gordon ?
I think that doing a road map, monitoring the gap between actual and desired activities, and monitoring achievement of KPIs makes a lot of sense (along with the courage to abandon something that is really not working and, concomitantly, stick with something that hasn’t yet landed).
I don’t think that those activities constitute a “maturity” model. Its more of a think, plan, act, and then reflect (and repeat) cycle. Which makes a lot more sense to me than following what I would argue is an artificially created you start at A, go to B, and end up at C (which is how I read most maturity models).
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Gordon
Hey Gordon
Yes, I understand your point – it is the “normal” cycle of think-plan-act-reflect, rinse and repeat, but I just wonder if there is there could be a element of more ‘formal’ benchmarking which may include an element of a maturity model. For example, in Law firms where there is a good, and apparently well understood definition of KM, where a firm might be able to benchmark it’s activities against another firm…. ?