Mopsos

I have always been wondering why KM programs were so controversial, why they could flourish only « with a strong support of top management », why there were so many social activists among bloggers…
Reading a book recently about Louis XIV ("le roi soleil se lève aussi" of Philippe Beaussant ), I found out that the Palace of Versailles was indeed a KM project, and very similar in spirit to the widely acclaimed “Future Center” of Skandia.

First, consider that Versailles was built with a clear political purpose : Establish the power of the king of France over the French nobility. Indeed, the struggle to build the French nation had been going on since the fall of the Roman Empire. French Counts and Dukes were sometimes extremely powerful, and always determined to keep control on the land they possessed (a.k.a. budgets), to the extent that they often fought against the king whenever he became a little too « bossy ». So, until the 17th century, the king of France was travelling all year long in the provinces to meet his vassals and make sure they were still faithful to him.

Versailles was a breakthrough in internal politics. I was meant to force the most powerful to move away from their territories and live closer to the king, thus concentrating more power in his hands.

But there is more to that. As king Louis XIV said in his memoirs « if there is something singular in this monarchy, it’s the free and easy access to the prince for its subjects ». Versailles was meant to be a place where everybody, not just people from the king’s inner circle, could have a chance to meet the king. Louis XIV knew that he needed a countervailing power to the court of mighty princes if he were to establish his absolute authority, and that he needed to rely on the people for this. Not the “masses”, as in 20th century populism, but educated people, intellectuals, scientists, and (mainly) writers. Some of them, like young Molière, had the immense privilege to be the first to visit the king in his bedroom in the morning , because his father was in charge of the king’s nightgown. He would come in first, well before the “Little Awakening” ceremony (“Petit Lever”) were Monsieur, the king’s brother, was allowed to enter the room and present his greetings.

But there is even more to that. The king allowed those intellectuals to speak very freely, and he would accept critics from them that he would never tolerate from members of his own house. Many theatre plays of Molière, for example, make a mockery of the habits of the court, and sourly criticize the behaviour of the princes. Oftentimes, the king participated in the scenario, and would even play a role himself in the play…

I think this reflects the essence of Knowledge Management in corporate life. It takes a lot of wisdom and courage for CEOs to embrace KM, because by doing that, they actually acknowledge that there needs to be a countervailing power of practitioners on the field to the power of the management, in pretty much the same way as in the political sphere. Taking this into account is what distinguishes great leaders from dictators and tyrants. Only today, the modern Versailles palaces are not limited to the political arena, and they are not only made of stone. They also have their virtual side on the web.

I understand a little more now why Bruno Laporte told me back in June 2002 that, in spite of the obvious success of the Worldbank’s knowledge sharing program, he was still struggling to justify its very existence. If you consider the Worldbank’s knowledge sharing program as a program geared at organizing a countervailing power, it is not surprising that many managers would try and oppose it.

Quote from Louis XIV:

« Il est des nations où la majesté des rois consiste, pour une grande partie, à ne se point laisser voir, et cela peul avoir des raisons parmi les esprits accoutumés à la servitude qu'on ne gouverne que par la crainte et la terreur. Ce n'est pas le génie de nos Français, et, d'aussi loin que nos histoires nous en peuvent instruire, s'il y a quelque caractère singulier dans cette monarchie, c'est l'accès libre et facile des sujets au prince. C'est une égalité, la justice entre lui et eux, qui les tient pour ainsi dire dans une société douce et honnête » (Louis XIV - Memoirs)

Approximate translation : « There are some nations where the majesty of the kings consists, to a large extent, of not allowing themselves to be seen, and this can have some reasons among those minds that are used to slavery and that are governed only by fear and terror. It is not the genius of our French, and, as far as our history can teach us, if there is something singular in this monarchy, it’s free and easy access to the prince for its subjects. It is an equality, the justice betweem him and them, that holds them together, so to speak, in a sweet and honest society ». The text in French is of course a much more pleasant read.

I love you and your website. Its amazing. Thank you so much, you've saved my life. I will write again soon with your task.

Posted by: Chicco G. at March 2, 2004 12:59 PM

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)