cindy lemcke-hoong, 01-Aug-03 @ 17:15PM

A/P culture sharing --- KM Standards

Hi Neill,

There is an interesting discussion thread on the Asian Pacific Zone about Culture and KM Sharing. Would be nice to see some cross-pollinations between A/P and your SIG??

Here is their link :
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?forum=1&topic=133&comment=1632

or just go to Asian Pacific zone discussion forum.

Enjoy!

Cindy

Neill Allan, 31-Jul-03 @ 18:44PM

Leadership & Culture in SMEs

Although certain cultural values assist KM and strong knowledge-aware leadership is a great benefit,; unless it is a start-up where a conducive culture may be formed from the outset, the culture is what the culture is and the task will be to ensure that the KM programme and strategy involves matching or changing the existing culture (and subcultures).

In Section 5.5.1 there is reference to cultural layers that you describe and I agree that the work of Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner is relevant in many SMEs as well as with global corporates.

Yes, Chris, your observation is correct: there is a strong drive to be of significant benefit to SMEs with the CEN publication, whereas the BSI aim is to produce documents of greater breadth and depth providing benefit across all sectors and sizes.

Chris Macrae, 31-Jul-03 @ 11:20AM

one way

My guess is we are looking at all this in monocrome where we should be cross-pollinating with diverse ideas like these of the social software people at headshift http://www.headshift.com/moments/archives/000124.htm and these of Debra Amidon at http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=87494&d=1&h=417&f=56&dateformat=%o%20%B%20%Y

In Bogotá, Colombia, recently I addressed some entrepreneurs and told them what I would be seeking of I were a venture capitalist. Right now, they seek to fund a wiz-bang technology; and what they SHOULD be seeking is how an enterprise will have the capacity to innovate in the future.

I'm preparing an article on the topic; but in the meantime -in essence,

(1) How do they manage the innovation process?
(2) How do they measure the intangible value?
(3) How do they use education/training capability to incubate new business?
(4) How do they operate as a distributed learning network?
(5) How do they monitor their competitive intelligence of where their competition is headed?
(6) How do the plan to innovate new knowledge products and services?
(7) How do they manage their strategic alliance and other stakeholder relationships?
(8) How do they manage their customer interaction and market perception?
(9) How do they develop and manage their leadership capability both internally and externally?
(10) How do they utilize their computer and communications capability as an innovation tool?

Chris Macrae, 30-Jul-03 @ 19:39PM

culture of SME's- puzzles

In a traditional small organisation with one clear leader, I might wrongly have said culture is only something that really needs embedding when the circle of people get too many for all to regularly see the leader

Of course, this is making at least 2 more heroic assumptions:
1) we have one leader, rather than a lot of equal partners
2) that they are connected in a real place, rather than through virtual modes

To the extent that each person (or very small group) is an atom in a network, I suppose culture kicks in more in the way that Trompeenars would profile, ie less from the organisation and more the national or other backgrounds a person brings with their interpreations of another

Again, if org culture is the way we do things round here ( ie hoping that anyone for the same organisation would behave in fairly consistent ways), we are not talking so much about organisational culture but personal values and agreed rules in force if we are trying to work out whether 10 people as their individual SMEs are going to harmoniously fit together

Incidentally, as part of a 5 report collection into good practice, are all tehse reports supposed to be take mainly a SME lenses? All this is jolly confusing contextually as I have a BSI leaflet in front of me which refers to a similar series of reports but makes no specific refernce to SMEs

Neill Allan, 30-Jul-03 @ 18:59PM

SME versus large organzational cultures

Chris, you also raised questions about cultures in SMEs. As cultures are built from 'negotiated' shared beliefs, they exist dynamically and in all groups. Often these negotiations are conducted inately when people assess each other in meetings - virtual, telephone, through written documents or face-face. There will be subcultures and some degree of coherent main culture in a large grouping e.g s large company or ministry.

I totally agree that the cultural structure of SMEs, SME cooperatives and large organizations are different, as are the commercial imperatives and drivers. Power of influence in small organizations tends to differ from the way individuals and groups wield influence in large organizations. That is why the culture work item has a strong emphasis on relationships.

Transfering 'best practice' between organizations of any size/type requires mature consideration of differences. Between large and small organizations these can be highly significant. To create practical guidance one of the best things we can do is create awareness and a desire to underpin KM implementations with values, competencies and practical experiences which the reader can relate to.

Neill Allan, 30-Jul-03 @ 18:41PM

Responses to discusion

Thank you all for you suggestions.
The main target for the project is to provide practical advice and guidance, particularly, to the huge numbre of SMEs in Europe. Words are at a premium.
Chris, Malcolm and John, these are good approaches, where you have the practical experience. Can you condense the approach and benefits (approx. 50-80 words) and demonstrate with learning points within a worked example, preferably in an SME (up to 150- words) and indicate where you feel it should appear in the Work Item?

Chris Macrae, 30-Jul-03 @ 17:59PM

a parallel Jim Collins conversation

I am taking the Jim Collins conversation in a different direction than it would be fair to preoccupy this thread with at http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=115744&d=1&h=417&f=56&dateformat=%o%20%B%20%Y

do come and join in if you feel like a stereo conversation on leadership

Malcolm Allan, 30-Jul-03 @ 15:11PM

Creativity is a characteristic of authentic transformational leadership

Creativity is one of the characteristics of what I term authentic transformational leadership along with such traits as being "innovative", being a "conductor", a "servant", a "steward", being "transparent" in sharing who you are and what you want to do. creative leadership creates a culture in which the generation of ideas is fostered and supported as the fuel for innovation. Innovative leadership recognises that innovation is at the heart of the ongoing development of organisations. Being a conductor enables you to hear and be "opn-song" with your organisation. Service recognises that you serve the interests of the organisation as a whole, your shareholders, stakeholder and staff as well as your customers and that you have a responsibility for the impact of your actions on the world in which you operater. Stewardship recognises that you are responsible for the preservation and development of all of the assets and resources of your organisation not just shareholder value and market share; your people, their development, their part in your history, their role as the creators of your intellectual capital and as your "difference" -creating the intangibles that differentiate you from the competition. For a fuller understanding of how these characteristics describe authentic transformational leadership read the White paper on this topic at www.atLeadership.com/whitepapers.html

John Moore, 30-Jul-03 @ 14:07PM

Creators vs Reactors

I think Collins work contrasting the two leadership styles is very powerful. I can think of examples of each and the impact in both cases is enormous.

In marketing (my trade) I see a great many reactors climbing the organisational scales bring a deeply dispiriting narcissism to bear.

When I meet creators, who have managed to restrain their ego, the impact on me is to encourage powerful engagement.

Chris Macrae, 30-Jul-03 @ 00:56AM

Jim Collins Part 2

Jim Collin's heros are called self-directed people: They just go about the daily tasks of building a successful enterprise: trying to build sustainability, create innovations that make a contribution, and add value. They are out there in places like Minnetonka, Minnesota, quietly going about their work. These are also the people who, when confronted with an environment that asked them to breach their values, refuse to participate (akin to those who refused to shock the "learner" with intense electrical jolts in the famous Stanley Milgram experiments, despite the fact that 65% of the test subjects did so).

There's a great profiling comparison Jim Collins gives between the reactor leader (and culture set) and the creative leader (and culture set)

CREATOR
Internally driven, externally aware
Pursues creative strategy
Discovers genetic talents and applies them
Builds an economic engine to get things done
Many once-in-a-lifetime opportunities
Growth follows from creative contribution
Ambitious first and foremost for the work
Focuses on building relationships
Values self-improvement for its own sake
Sets 10-to-25-year audacious goals
Core values inform all efforts
Seeks self-actualization

REACTOR
Externally driven, without intrinsic passion
Pursues competitive strategy
Agenda of competence set by the outside world
Gets things done to make a lot of money
Few once-in-a-lifetime opportunities
Seeks growth for growth's sake
Ambitious first and foremost for self
Focuses on transactions
Driven largely by comparison to others
Five years is long-term
Nothing is sacred; expedience rules
Seeks success

Chris Macrae, 30-Jul-03 @ 00:41AM

Snowden's Cynefin Centre & Jim Collins

I have a pdf based on Snowden's commercial thinktank approach done in association with IBM which calls their flagship executive education program - the paradox of culture

I was wondering if anyone knew to what extent this has been gaining momentum. What bothers me is for at least 10 years the likes of Jim Collins have clarified how systemically huge and rich cultural approaches to organsiation should be, but on average I would say they are still walked not talked. Is anyone more optimistic than I that culture is finally being grasped by leaders?

We certainly need to make sure that K'board 2 includes culture as one of its ongoing debating themes and city by city roadshow topics but I wonder what's the unforgettable training module that we could use...

In browsing http://www.jimcollins.com, I find his creator versus reactor paradigm of leadership compelling - and a reason why we must speak innovation and KM everywhere in the same breadth but culturally so. Extract:
The distinction isn't between a market that's going up and a market that's going down. It's between people who are fundamentally creators and people who are only reactors, who take their cues from the outside world.

If you did a word search across my research materials on the greatest company builders of the past 100 years, you would find almost no mention of "competitive strategy." Not that those builders had no strategy; they clearly did. But they did not craft their strategies principally in reaction to the competitive landscape or in response to external conditions and shocks. Without question, they kept a wary eye on the brutal facts.The fundamental drive to transform and build their companies was internal and creative. It didn't matter whether they faced a crisis (as did Thomas J. Watson Sr. at IBM, who never resorted to layoffs in the Great Depression) or whether they faced calm (as did Walt Disney when he conceived of Disneyland). The leaders who built enduring great companies showed a creative inside-out approach rather than a reactive outside-in approach. In contrast, the mediocre company leaders displayed a pattern of lurching and thrashing, running about in frantic reaction to threats and opportunities.

If I could bring all of my students back into the classroom, I would remind them of David Packard's admonition that in the long run, "more companies die of indigestion than starvation." If a company focuses on making creative contributions that fall in the middle of three intersecting circles—what it is passionate about, what it can be the best in the world at, and what best drives a sustained profitable economic engine—then growth will likely follow.

John Moore, 28-Jul-03 @ 21:04PM

Love the before and after

Chris: I too feel enthusiastic about the before and after matrix you excerpted.

I'm hugely biassed because a great many of these ideas are practised with some commitment by practioners of Improv, an art form of which I am a huge fan. Many Improv exercises are performed by participants in a circle (few management levels); there are very few rules and a few well-established principles; Improv works precisely because people learn to take risks rather than stay safe; and the idea of shared responsbility is what makes Improv work - rather than a spirit of competition.

Of course, what really gets me excited about Improv is the in-the-moment experience of being with other people who love it.

For anyone who's tempted to find out more, I heartily recommend a visit to the Improv in Business website where there is a growing treasure trove of material and ideas.

The importance of this is that people need to have real experiences of what happens when communities start to function in the way foretold in this matrix. This is one of the ways in which KM can leap off the academic shelves and take root in the actual lives of people and organisations.

Chris Macrae, 24-Jul-03 @ 07:22AM

contexts of culture

When I think of culture as something that needs to be systemised, the main works and cases I know involve large organisations (eg the suject of the breakthrouugh book of the 1990s Built to Last by Collins and Porras) - in these cases culture either aligns or misaligns the whole human system

I am wondering how one contextualises culture in other cases , eg SME's. For example, is the main perspective that needs to be understood the culture of each SME or the culture of the cluster that assuming that there is a stage of entrepreneurial SME evolution that involves getting clustered or networked as a critical success factor?

More generally I would be fascinated to hear if there are any leading references to work where culture has been studied not at the organisational unit but across the network of organisations which today is the essential element in appriasing any global market.

I feel that the large and SME are almost direct opposites contextually in most aspects of KM implementation (ie best practice for one is time-wasting or worst-prcatice for the other). If others share this feeling , how do we clarify a priority checklist of potential opposites of contexts (culture being one?)

Chris Macrae, 15-Jul-03 @ 23:47PM

much to like but

I like most of what's here and in particular enjoyed the pre, post- matrix

"When looking at organisational culture that is favouring the creation, sharing and application of knowledge, there are some differences with the culture that was (and is) predominant in the industrial or traditional type of organisations:

Traditional Culture vs Knowledge-aware Culture

Limited information distribution vs Wide information distribution

Many management levels vs Few management levels

Uneven responsibility vs Shared responsibility

Rules based vs Principles based

Formal Structure vs Informal Structure

Risk adverse vs Able to take some risks

Occasional training policy vs Continuous learning policy

Financial focus vs Marketing focus

Political vs Open

Knowledge retention vs Knowledge sharing & utilisation

One organisation, one culture vs Influences on organisational culture from the networks in which an organisation participates"

HOWEVER, I did not see much reference to the extreme unlikelihood that any of tese cutural changeovers will be systemised unless metrics governance is changed. Perhaps an appropriate link to this is at
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=114855&d=1&h=417&f=56&dateformat=%o%20%B%20%Y