PKMastery

Personal knowledge mastery

Don’t worry, nobody can steal your knowledge

by

Why do I share my knowledge? Well, actually, I don’t. I could not share my knowledge with you, if I wanted. There is no such thing as knowledge transfer. Data and information can be transferred, but not knowledge.

So what is the idea behind behind personal knowledge mastery and the Seek>Sense>Share framework if knowledge cannot be shared in the first place? For me, PKM is a set of practices I can use to better articulate my knowledge. Seeking information from diverse sources gives me a better chance of seeing a fuller picture of our complex environment. Taking time to put my thoughts into words forces me to reflect and try to make some sense of the divergent voices coming from all over. Sharing the results of this sense-making gives back to the networks from which I drew my information and also provides more feedback loops from a variety of perspectives. It enhances serendipity.

Sharing information and viewing it through our individual filters is the best that we can hope for in terms of knowledge transfer. But not sharing would be much worse. As Luis Suarez writes on a very related post:

To me, since we are all embarked on a lifetime learning experience of what we know, what’s around us, who we are, what we do and why we do it, who we connect with, etc. etc. knowledge sharing is innate to our human nature of wanting to connect and collaborate with others. We, human beings, are social beings, and as such have been bound to share what we know with others, so that our learning curve never becomes flat. On the contrary.

While knowledge cannot really be shared,  our knowledge-making experiences can. Perhaps that is why we love stories. They are a glimpse into others’ knowledge, more nuanced than any other communication medium. Sharing is essential for our own sense-making. So share as much as possible. Nobody can steal your knowledge anyway. But we will all lose, if we don’t share it.
knowledge stealing

Four circles to bind them

by

I’m still playing with Google Plus and have not made it an integrated part of my personal knowledge mastery process yet. One aspect of G+ I do not like is the inability to add tags or categorize what I find of interest, or to easily share with other networks. Sharing inside, of course, is easy, as Google would prefer you stay inside their ecosystem. What I usually do with G+ posts I like is 1) post them to Twitter, 2) add as Twitter favourites 3) and then curate them on my weekly Friday’s Finds blog post. It’s a bit convoluted but it kind of works. I could do the same by checking my ‘+1’ tagged items and regularly curating them on my blog.

I really like the Google Plus Hangout feature, which allows for immediate video conferencing, for up to 10 people, and integrates tools such as Google Documents for collaborative writing. Using the ‘On Air’ function lets you live broadcast your meeting via YouTube, which is then automatically recorded and saved as a YouTube video. It is seamless. The audio/video is very high quality with much less lag than Skype.

There is a feature of G+ that makes me think it can be the one to rule them all. These are circles. You add people to circles (which you can name) and then post updates on G+ to one or more circles of your choosing, or make them Public. Almost all of mine are public. But circles work both ways. You can control how much you see from each circle. I would suggest starting out by creating four circles, one for each setting. The settings slider appears on the right when you click on one of your circle names from the G+ Home page.

 There are four settings available:

  • Show nothing
  • Show some posts
  • Show most posts (what G+ recommends, but that’s for them, not you)
  • Show every post

There is also a bell symbol on the right  to subscribe to notifications (it’s a push function so you don’t miss anything). You see these settings explained when you hover your cursor over the slider.

So if you create four initial circles, you could use them as a filter to get better signal and less noise. You don’t need to spend a lot of time making a decision on where to put someone, as it’s easy to move a person from one circle to another. Fine-tuning this over time  could make your G+ stream a valuable information resource.

None: For people who have you in their circles, but you are not really interested in what they have to say, but feel you should be connected anyway. This group is handy if you don’t want something to be Public but want to reach a broader audience.

Some: These are people you know slightly or perhaps post too many updates.

Most: For people you know better, or usually post interesting things, but you don’t feel to you need to see everything.

Every Post: Good for work teams or fellow employees. I use this for my Internet Time Alliance colleagues.

I have found some deep conversations on G+, which is not limited by 140 characters. It integrates with other Google platforms, so it’s easy to share from Google Reader to Google Plus. Over time, I am finding it a good place to have some meaningful conversations. As with Twitter, if you find G+ boring, then you are following (circling) the wrong people.

Networked sharing

by

Why diversity is essential for innovation, and ultimately survival, is shown in this wide-ranging article on How Culture Drove Human Evolution:

You start out with two genetically well-intermixed peoples. Tasmania’s actually connected to mainland Australia so it’s just a peninsula. Then about 10,000 years ago, the environment changes, it gets warmer and the Bass Strait floods, so this cuts off Tasmania from the rest of Australia, and it’s at that point that they begin to have this technological downturn. You can show that this is the kind of thing you’d expect if societies are like brains in the sense that they store information as a group and that when someone learns, they’re learning from the most successful member, and that information is being passed from different communities, and the larger the population, the more different minds you have working on the problem.

If your number of minds working on the problem gets small enough, you can actually begin to lose information. There’s a steady state level of information that depends on the size of your population and the interconnectedness. It also depends on the innovativeness of your individuals, but that has a relatively small effect compared to the effect of being well interconnected and having a large population.

It’s not about innovative individuals so much as the ability of the network (society, organization, company) to stay connected to its collective knowledge.  This is an important factor to consider in knowledge-intensive organizations. How quickly would your lose collective knowledge if people do not share their knowledge? Are your knowledge networks large enough to ensure that collective knowledge does not get lost? Is your organization more like an isolated island or part of a connected and diverse continent?

 

Basic Skills for Net Work

by

We are starting the online PKM Workshop this week, with a free webinar on 5 September.

Here are some questions that personal knowledge management can address:

How do I keep track of all of this information? >> start small

How do I make sense of changing conditions and new knowledge? >> curation

How can I develop and improve critical thinking skills? >> Observe, Participate, Challenge, Create

How can we cooperate? >> freely share

How can I collaborate better? >> learn out loud

How can I engage in problem-solving activities at the edge of my expertise? >> net work skills

#itashare

Barriers to PKM

by

A few weeks ago I asked my extended online network: What do you think is the biggest fear/need/barrier when it comes to adopting personal knowledge mastery (PKM) as a practice?

Finding someone to talk to about PKM was a common response, as was the observation that management’s perception is often that not everyone has the same level of ability to do PKM sufficiently well. Management thinks PKM is only for certain, higher-level employees (it’s not). Also listed were fear of technology and fear of complexity, and I see these as two sides of the same coin. Network technologies make things more complex as there are exponentially more connections and possibilities. The complexity of multiple perspectives and solutions can be quite confusing. In PKM, there is no test and no answer sheet, only deeper questions, but an expanding network to help you.

Some people cited a lack of time management skills to make room in the day for changing and learning. Others listed difficulties in being able to build relationships or dealing with too wide of a range of topics. Perhaps the latter is a byproduct of our education systems where we concentrate on only a few subjects at a time, and seldom make connections between them. One person in the PKM Workshop said that sharing what you really think and finding your real voice is a major challenge for those not used to capturing and sharing their learning.

In my opinion, a major barrier to adopting PKM practices is the perception that it will take more time, when in fact, most people waste a lot of time on existing work habits that could be changed. Another reason is the baggage of our education and training systems, which tell us that we cannot learn for ourselves and need an expert or teacher to always guide us. The image below is from a post I wrote 5 years ago, on what is weighing down learning, but is still relevant I think. PKM practices can help people take off those weights. You might call it the PKM Weight Reduction Program for self-directed and peer-supported learning.
iceberg

Please tell me about your PKM

by

I had the pleasure of a visit from Jon Husband this week, only the second time that we’ve been together. Jon and his wirearchy framework have been an integral part of my views on the network era workplace since 2004. I even have a separate category for wirearchy on this website.

During one of our conversations at a local café, Jon suggested that in wirearchies,  personal knowledge management (PKM) could become the new resumé. One problem with a résumé is that it only looks backwards, on past achievements. Even behavioural interviews look at how we have dealt with past problems. What about how we prepare for new problems?

I think that asking, “What can you do for the organization today?”, would be a better way to start an interview. Considering that in complex, networked environments, where work is learning and learning is the work, would it not be better to find out how people are learning? Imagine an interview beginning with, “Good day, Mister Jones, please sit down and tell us about your PKM.” Other questions could follow:

  • How do you keep your learning up to date?
  • With whom do you learn?
  • How do you capture your learning?
  • How do you narrate your work? Please show us an example …
  • How do you stay current in your field?
  • How diverse is your network? Could you give us some examples?
  • How would you begin to look at the following problem, which is out of your normal scope of work …

Describing how we stay actively engaged in our learning might be a better indicator of future performance, in a world where many answers do not lie in the past, but in how we manage to make connections with the present. To remain relevant, workers need to re-skill and provide services for today’s and tomorrow’s problems, not yesterday’s. We need to think more like artists and look at creating new ways of working, not polishing our previous successes. Showing how we learn, or manage our knowledge personally, keeps us focused on the present. It’s time for HR to start asking about our PKM, and understand its value.

Sharing with discernment

by

I was asked to elaborate between collaboration and cooperation in my last post. I responded that in the network era, collaboration specialists need to cooperate. Cooperation is quite different from collaboration, but is necessary for a networked, coherent enterprise. I hope this image makes it clearer.

I also looked at how PKM is a core skill set in a networked enterprise, empowering workers to take control of their own learning. A Seek-Sense-Share framework helps people to seek new contacts in their social networks, and communities of practice. The basic flow goes from outside, to inside, and back out.

First seek information and connections in your social networks and communities of practice. This of course requires that one connects in the first place. Good filtering skills are necessary to ensure a decent signal to noise ratio.

Filtered information can then be used in our sense-making processes. A key aspect of sense-making is creating something. This can be an information product or an action, like a probe, or experimental way of doing something, like a new work practice.

An important aspect of sharing is knowing when, with whom, and how to share. It may be posting to the web, like this blog, or it may be more directed and to a certain community. Sharing using a blog, with permalinks, categories and tags, makes it easier to share when a need arises in your networks or communities. Sharing with intent is curation, while PKM can be viewed as pre-curation. It takes discernment to know when and how to share.

A shotgun approach to knowledge sharing will not work. Showing discernment in knowledge sharing helps to build trust. Becoming a trusted node in your communities and networks (with a good signal to noise ratio) ensures that your voice will be heard.

Connecting learning and work and life

by

In discussing how communities of practice can bridge the gap between innovation (new ideas) and getting work done (usually in project or work teams), I derived this graphic. For a detailed explanation of my thinking behind this, see my presentation on communities and the coherent enterprise.

I have observed that what underlies creative and complex work (the future of work in the network era, in my opinion) is  empowered workers who take control of their own learning. This is the premise of personal knowledge management. PKM is not just about finding information, but also connecting to people.

Using the Seek-Sense-Share framework, people seek new contacts in their social networks, and over time (filtering), some become co-members in communities of practice. Communities of practice help to inform our work and life, some of our learning and observations creating new ideas or practices. We can then share these new ideas with our communities, discerning who and how to share with, at the appropriate times. For instance, we may share a new practice first with a professional community of practice before publishing it to our general social networks.

A key part of PKM is connecting our networks, our communities, our work, and our lives together in order to make sense, be more productive, and open ourselves to serendipity. It’s a holistic approach, not one that compartmentalizes work and life, but something that helps us to make sense of the whole messy, complex world we live in. As such, it’s always a work in progress, but it starts by connecting to others.

PKM is not a technology

by

My definition of personal knowledge management is quite short:

PKM: A set of processes, individually constructed, to help each of us make sense of our world, work more effectively, and contribute to society.

PKM is not a technology, an enterprise system, a piece of software, or a platform. If anyone is selling you a PKM system, they do not understand it. Walk away before you waste your money. The best technology for enabling PKM is the Internet. People don’t need anything else, other than getting rid of barriers that impede their learning. These barriers include social media policies, firewalls, inefficient work practices, defining people by their job, and many others, too numerous to name. Usually the barriers stem from the organizational structure or from management.

PKM 2008

For me, PKM really means:

Personal – according to one’s abilities, interests & motivation (not directed by external forces).

Knowledge – connecting information to experience (know what, know who, know how).

Management – getting things done [not being managed].

PKM 2010

It is not PKM if there is no additional value created. In other words, PKM is not about collecting things and filing them away, no matter how fancy it looks on some software platform. PKM is creating a sense-making process that works for you, and that you regularly use. PKM is beyond the workplace, just as workers are not always at work, but are always learning.

For me, it’s using writing, particularly here on my blog, to make sense of concepts, theories, experiences, and opinions related to my professional life. Sometimes my non-professional life gets involved, and that’s just fine with me. For you, it’s probably something else, and that is the wonderful thing: there is no single PKM system for all. People practising PKM, in their own ways, add to the diversity of thinking in organizations and society. A single system would kill diverse thinking, which in turn would destroy any potential for change or innovation.

Why is PKM important?

Formal training only accounts for 5% of workers’ learning needs.

Training courses often assume a dependent learner as passive recipient. This can kill creativity and motivation.

PKM builds reflection into our learning & working, helping us adapt to change and new situations. It can also help develop critical thinking skills.

Active PKM practices help to make each person a contributing node in knowledge networks. It is the foundation for social learning, which drives social business.

—

Note: My next online PKM Workshop (technology-agnostic)

PKM starts new workshop series

by

So far in 2012, I have hosted three online workshops on personal knowledge mastery (PKM), as well as a Summer Camp that included one week on the topic. Over 125 people have participated in these online sessions, compared with about a dozen who came to the on-site classroom course that I offered through the University of Toronto’s iSchool Institute for the past two years. I’ll let the numbers speak for themselves.

Read more