Excellent post on Library Clips about the reason why KM 1.0 has by and large failed to deliver and what KM 2.0 is about.
The traditional approach to KM, dubbed KM 1.0, is about "deploying" specific knowledge sharing tools to be used for extra "above-the-flow" tasks of capturing and sharing knowledge in the form of structured content. Since those tools are usually quite cumbersome to use, and are justified by potential reuse of content by others in the future, their use is mainly enforced by a culture of recognition and rewards for those who share, and/or sticks for those who don't.
Another approach, dubbed KM 2.0, and which could be called "in-the-flow" KM, is more "a way to do your work, and by default you have shared knowledge at the same time, without it having to be an explicit task". It aims at replacing e-mail and phone, not libraries, and it is enforced by a culture of experimentation of advanced technologies on practical cases.
Indeed, our enterprise discussions to promote KM should always navigate between these two extreme scenarios:
- devising knowledge sharing incentives to overcome the burden of cumbersome legacy KM technology,
- making KM transparent by hiding it behind existing business processes through leading edge technology,
and of course making trade-offs, because it will never be 100% one or the other.
