INTERNATIONAL TRACKING SURVEY REPORT ‘03

NUMBER TWO

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

Prepared by

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

++++ Thomas B.Riley

Chair and Executive Director Commonwealth Centre for Electronic Governance

http://www.electronicgov.net Visiting Professor

University of Glasgow President, Riley Information Services

100 Bronson Ave., Suite 1203, Ottawa, Canada K1R 6G8 http://www.rileyis.com

E: Tom@Rileyis.com

Prepared under the auspices of the Commonwealth Secretariat

And

Co-sponsored by Government Telecommunications and Informatics Program,

Public Works and Government Services Canada

June 3, 2003

1

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROLOGUE.................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 3 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY................................ 3

What Is Knowledge?....................................................................................................... 5 Knowledge Mobilization ................................................................................................ 5 KM Reality Check .......................................................................................................... 6 Knowledge Management ................................................................................................ 6

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FORMS AND FLOWS............................... 7 Tacit Knowledge............................................................................................................. 7 Codifying ........................................................................................................................ 8 Explicit Knowledge ........................................................................................................ 8 Hardening........................................................................................................................ 9 Learning ........................................................................................................................ 10 Reinforcing ................................................................................................................... 10 Sharing .......................................................................................................................... 11

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE WORLD BANK GROUP........................................................................................................................................... 12

Knowledge Management Secretariat ............................................................................ 12 Creating Knowledge in Developing Countries ............................................................. 12 Sharing Knowledge: Internally and Externally............................................................. 13 Facilitating Knowledge................................................................................................. 14 Changing Attitudes and Organization........................................................................... 14 Knowledge Sharing: Key Factors ................................................................................. 15 Network Knowledge ..................................................................................................... 15 Capturing....................................................................................................................... 16 Distributing ................................................................................................................... 16 Circulating..................................................................................................................... 17 Informing ...................................................................................................................... 18

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY.............................. 18 Searching And Search Engines..................................................................................... 19 Categorizing and Computer Languages........................................................................ 19 Composing and Office Suite Applications ................................................................... 20 Summarizing and Artificial Intelligence....................................................................... 20 Storing and Storage Media............................................................................................ 21 Distributing and Networks............................................................................................ 22 Workflow and Groupware ............................................................................................ 23 Forms, Flows, Functionality & Technology................................................................. 23

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 24

2

PROLOGUE This is the second in a series of five reports assessing international developments in the policies and public administration issues now driving e-government and e-governance. As e-government principles and practices have been applied in the past few years it has been clear that fundamental governance issues determine the workability of the application of e-services delivery and e-programs. The next report will deal with the nature of government information in a growing global information society and how applications of information distribution can better assist the public in contributing effectively to the knowledge society. Thus, the third report in this series will assess the pivotal role that information is taking in e-government and why governments are starting to look at ways to distribute wider amounts of information to the public. More information made available to the public could contribute to the stimulation of the knowledge economy. These reports represent guidelines for policy implementations for e-government that can be used by governments, whether they are developed or developing countries. Following the first three Reports will be an analysis and assessment of the e-democracy and e-participation movement and how government is responding to this new trend. Networked communities are quickly evolving through the Internet and, increasingly, citizens are using the new technologies to organize themselves so their voices can be heard and to also develop tools to attempt to influence government policy and programs at the political and public administration level. The current report was prepared under the auspices of the Commonwealth Secretariat, London, UK and the Telecommunications and Informatics Services Branch of Public Works and Government services Canada. William Sheridan, policy analyst, Informetrica Inc, Ottawa and Research Fellow for CCEG, is thanked for his contribution to the preparation of this Report.

INTRODUCTION

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

Research for this paper has shown that the application of Knowledge Management is beginning to grow within many government departments. It is not as entrenched as Information Management. The latter is considered a necessity for the handling of the creation, distribution and retention of records, and the organizing and dispersing of massive information holdings within government. However, knowledge management is experiencing incremental but significant growth, because in the growing knowledge economy, knowledge itself is becoming paramount. Knowledge is now perceived as an asset that can enhance any organization, whether it is in the public or private sector.

3

Knowledge is now recognized, in many government circles, as an important commodity that can benefit government departments in their day-to-day operations and the public in the growing efforts to be effective in the modern knowledge economy. The challenge now for organizations is to determine and develop principles and guidelines on how knowledge can be created, harnessed, shared and distributed among government agencies and to the public. Thus, this second Report of the series of International Tracking Report ’03 analyses some of the basic tenets and progress being made in the field of knowledge management. The paper presents some key definitions that many experts now agree capture the essence of knowledge management. These include tacit, explicit and networked knowledge. The latter is an acknowledgement of the role that technology plays in the organizing, capturing and distribution of knowledge. However, knowledge management is not a technology driven subject. Technology is a facilitator of knowledge management, a tool to assist individuals and groups in the creation, capturing and distribution of knowledge. As with the implementation of e-government services and programs, sound principles and administrative precepts determine the success of any program or service. A hard lesson learnt by governments over the years has been the importance of determining best practices, sound governance principles, and mechanisms of feedback (such as opinion polls, research surveys and focus groups) to determine the needs of the public. Once sound strategies based on these essential principles are articulated, the requisite technologies are chosen, and information platforms and technology architectures are built accordingly. Even these apparently simple steps are not always a guarantee for success, and service delivery programs have to be rethought. Similar principles apply to knowledge management. It is clear that human, administrative and financial resources, combined with commitment from senior officials in agencies and departments, are necessary for a knowledge management exercise to be started. This paper presents some basic definitions, offers precepts as to how knowledge management can work, presents some of the personnel issues that need to be addressed to bring success for knowledge workers, offers some case examples on knowledge management implementation and analyzes the various technology solutions that can contribute to the success of a knowledge management program. As with the Information Management paper, in the first Report of this International Tracking Report series, this paper is very relevant to the evolution of e-government, e-governance and e-democracy in governments. Knowledge management seeks to capture information that can be translated into doable forms of knowledge that will result in practical applications. This paper is presented as an overview of essential principles so that government agencies, whether in the developed or developing world, can use these principles to assist in implementing a knowledge management program. The thesis of this series of reports is that the large amount of information assets in government data banks around the world constitutes a crucial resource that can benefit governments’ societies. The growth and spread of information and communication technologies have the potential to bring widespread benefits to governments who make

4

the choice to harness and distribute their information holdings in disparate forms to many different sectors of society.

What Is Knowledge? Before discussing how Knowledge Management relates to Technology, it is useful to define the way in which the terms “knowledge” and “knowledge management” will be used. Traditional philosophers have been proposing different definitions of knowledge since before Socrates. However, the problem with many of these definitions is that they imply both content and a context that are wider than either science or commerce. Knowledge, to be effective, must be able to be applied within a practical context. Any theory of knowledge management must embrace the concept of practicality and applicability. For the purposes of this paper, knowledge will be defined as actionable information, i.e., know-how, and knowledge management (KM) will be taken to mean smart use of know-how. In terms of organizations, both business and government, the know-how may refer to either internal operations, i.e. the back office, or the front office, i.e. value delivery to clients and citizens.

Knowledge Mobilization Consultant Michael J.D. Sutton of Ottawa has suggested that the term Knowledge Management be changed to Knowledge Mobilizationi to emphasize that the primary challenge is putting knowledge to work. However, while agreeing with this basic objective this paper will continue to use the more familiar, and acceptable, term of Knowledge Management. Most of the case studies about explaining and implementing knowledge management have focused mainly on business situations. By now there are hundreds of books available, so picking any of them to act as references is somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, choices for exploring knowledge management in this paper are based on primary references: 1) which are widely recognized and read; and 2) whose insights can be as readily applied to government as to business. Nonaka & H. Takeuchi combined the insight of philosopher Michael Polanyi and their own research on business organizations to write The Knowledge Creating Companyii, wherein they model knowledge as existing in two forms, either explicit or implicit, and then explore how transformations occur from one form into the other. Thomas A. Stewart, an editor of Fortune Magazine, takes a closer look at the organizational context, and proposes that knowledge also exists in a third, network form, in his book The Wealth Of Knowledge. Together these analysts present “the state of the art” in knowledge management thinking. Much of the analysis is this paper is the based on their insight.

5

There are three forms of knowledge that shall be explored (tacit, explicit, and network), trisecting the total domain of knowledge.

KM Reality Check Before turning directly to the relationship between Knowledge Management and Technology however, some preliminary points should be covered. The social costs of using knowledge are just as real as for other commodities, but they are distributed differently. There are three types of costs associated with knowledge use:

• availability (getting knowledge to users) • accessibility (opening knowledge for use) • applicability (using knowledge effectively)

Availability is only possible through the network of computers and communications links. This infrastructure is very expensive to construct, maintain, upgrade. Fortunately for many users however, the costs of the social network platform of this infrastructure is shared widely, so individual owners can afford to “rent” the use of them (like roads).

Accessibility requires the appropriate technology to open the knowledge within the format in which it is provided. There are many file formats, and they need either specific software or a generic viewer to access them. Similarly, hardware alternatives such as specialized media drivers (for CDs, floppy disks, etc.), and accessories (speakers, printers, etc.) are also needed to enable accessibility.

Applicability is the next hurdle, and for this, questions need to be asked:

Even if you can get and open the knowledge-containing medium, does it contain the functionality that your task requires?

Do you know how to utilize that functionality to complete the task in a competent and timely manner? Either you spend the time previously to learn how to apply the knowledge, or you spend extra time during the task learning as you go.

The costs of availability, accessibility, and applicability are not usually charged to specific users, but are part of the social good of network infrastructure. But the rent charges for the services used are aggregated to cover those costs associated with knowledge use. Governments in particular are large enough users that they do bear considerable costs to create, operate, and maintain network infrastructures to enable knowledge work.

Knowledge Management Consideration of the costs and configuration of the equipment necessary to facilitate

6

knowledge work is the reason why KM in government bears an important relationship to technology. The costs of technology and the kinds of technology both enable knowledge management and limit its capability in so far as availability, accessibility, and applicability are provided for. How to describe the relationship between the forms and flows of knowledge, the functionality that these variables serve in knowledge management, and the technologies that have been developed to implement the functionality of forms and flows, is always a dilemma. In the real world of government operations, this set of variables is configured into a system wherein each component relies upon and supports all other components. So the decision, as to where to begin and the order in which to describe the components, is somewhat arbitrary. As suggested previously however, the rationale for our choice in this respect is that the design of such systems should proceed from description, to functionality, to technology.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FORMS AND FLOWS

Tacit Knowledge Knowledge has been defined as "know-how", and when it comes to managing knowledge, what is actually being managed are the people who carry the knowledge. Mobilizing this knowledge however, is a problem because one always knows more than one can say. The extent to which one’s knowledge is "inside the head" and implicit (consists of habits, feelings, rules of thumb, etc.) rather than explicit (formalized principles, procedures, algorithms, etc.), is the extent to which that knowledge is TACIT. In addition to not being able to articulate all of what one knows, many people are reluctant to disclose aspects of their knowledge even when they are conscious of them – they see their knowledge as a source of power (earning power and social prestige) that they are reluctant to share with a "quid pro quo". In this regard, many people regard the benefits of sharing as being highly over-rated, because they will lose control of an important source of value-added that they have invested considerable effort in creating and preserving. A good example of the implications of tacit knowledge within government concerns the situation many departments and agencies face as increasing numbers of civil servants near retirement age. Peter Drucker's insight is that the most valuable resource of a business is as applicable to government as it is to the private sector. Civil servants' knowledge that combines the nuances of dealing with clients and the range of effective organizational procedures, may have taken decades to accumulate and fine-tune. The process of transferring this knowledge has yet to be adequately specified or transformed into routine procedures.

7

The Government of Canada has just adopted the latest of a number of Public Service Renewal strategies, each of which have been motivated in part by the need to manage the prospect of a large-scale personnel turnover that results from pending widespread retirements. Managers have been empowered to hire with more flexibility and fewer rules. But even when younger candidates have been hired, the problem remains of how to harvest the knowledge of more senior and departing employees and impart it to incoming recruits. Many Knowledge Management requests for proposals (RFP) from departments and agencies are looking for consultants to devise a way to capture the existing knowledge in experienced heads before they depart from their jobs or retire.

Codifying When the tacit knowledge in people’s heads is harvested, the ideal circumstance is to CODIFY it into explicit knowledge. The reason that the process of transferring this knowledge has not been adequately specified or made routinely available, is that many government departments and agencies are not always able to invest sufficient time and effort into ensuring that the process is performed competently. What is required for effective codification is a debriefing team composed of at least a skilled interviewer, a systems analyst, and a knowledge engineer. Ideally the team would also include a scribe, and another person familiar with the subject matter under discussion. The technique for debriefing would be negotiated between the interviewee and a spokesperson for the team, the idea being to create a comfort zone within which the interviewee is most likely to reveal the greatest amount of the most useful knowledge. A spin-off of developing this process is to put in place an ongoing debriefing procedure so that knowledge codification can occur continuously instead of sporadically or at the end of a term of employment. Eileen M. Milleriii has chronicled a number of projects devoted to harvesting knowledge within the Government of the United Kingdom. Included in these projects are such steps as: an information audit, a personnel inventory, an organizational process list, and specification of service outputs.

Ultimately the aim is to define a knowledge value chain within the organization, together with the roles of those who contribute to it. One of the tests of the efficacy of the project is the performance by new recruits of the typical organizational tasks on the basis of the knowledge gleaned. But that, in turn, will only be possible once new recruits properly learn the explicit knowledge gleaned from old hands.

Explicit Knowledge When tacit knowledge has been codified it becomes EXPLICIT. It goes from being

8

heuristic (rule of thumb, habit, custom, etc.) to being algorithmic (formal rule, protocol, regulation, etc.). The rationale for transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is that it then becomes a resource that can be catalogued and re-used. In effect, it goes into the organization’s “pool of knowledge”, into which others can dip as the need arises. As government operations and services have become more knowledge-based over the years, their provision has become more sophisticated, and the skills on which they rely have become more specialized and differentiated. Often the knowledge workers know more about what to do, and how it has to be done, than any supervisor or executive could ever know. Process procedures or service eligibility rules will often require such expertise that few have the time or authorization needed to learn them. That is exactly why making them explicit is so important. More importantly, the results should be recorded in a manual or “help file” so there can be an understanding of the work done to date. If there are questions or uncertainties about what has been learned and recorded, or if new recruits need training, explicit sources can at least provide a beginning for the knowledge transfer process. The Center for Technology in Government (CTG) at the University of New York in Albany has studied the topic of explicit knowledge use very thoroughly.iv Once knowledge is formalized, it can guide all of the procedures that knowledge workers perform as they provide government services or carry out government operations. In a knowledge management sense, the two most important achievements of explicit knowledge are the accomplishment of cooperation and coordination. Information can be exchanged, compared, mined, and incorporated into decisions.

Hardening

The on-going process of hardening of explicit knowledge involves continuing research that confirms or revises the content of knowledge, and/or transfers knowledge repositories into suitable media for storage and access. As circumstances change, knowledge of those circumstances will have to be updated to ensure continuing accuracy. As the volume of knowledge increases, finding places to store it so that it is secure and accessible for use when needed, becomes a very demanding task.

As the population ages, completes education/training, changes jobs, changes residences, or changes marital status, these details have a bearing on who is eligible for what government services. In turn, governments modify policies and programs in response to these changes in the population. The new approach in government is evidence-based policy-making, which can be interpreted as another term for knowledge-based decisions. The knowledge at the centre of this process has to be kept as current as possible. Knowledge managers therefore split their time between information gathering on the one hand, and information dissemination on the other. Ian Wilson, the National Archivist of Canada, has elaborated on the challenge of storing explicit knowledge and information.v Policies must be developed to cover such issues as:

9

• Is storage compulsory or voluntary? • How is knowledge prioritized for storage? • Who should be authorized to store or revise knowledge? • What storage medium is to be used? • What is the appropriate duration of storage? • What is the purging policy for discarding?

All of these issues bear on the availability and accessibility of explicit knowledge. Only with such rules can a knowledge policy ensure that tasks are informed by knowledge, and unauthorized access is denied.

Learning

To the extent that knowledge has been made explicit, it can then serve as a basis for learning by both new recruits and regular employees. As the staff learns new knowledge, it does enter their heads and habits as tacit knowledge again. The important point is that this process should be made as systematic as the codifying procedures that turn tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge.

The two kinds of knowledge that new recruits need could be formalized for effective teaching. Content knowledge refers to the output that is delivered to government service recipients. Context knowledge refers to the operations that are performed in the value chain that leads to service output. If the service being delivered is the provision of a benefit, then the content knowledge consists of rules of eligibility, and determination of the appropriate kind and amount of service delivery required. The context knowledge consists of workflow and authorization arrangements whereby the request for service is processed and the decision recorded. The content and context of each procedure must both be learned to ensure effective performance.

Writing in e-Learning Magazine, Michael Welber reviews the support for learning alternatives within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.vi The article begins with an acknowledgement that learning programs for government employees have previously been disappointing. However, the combination of (a) so many new things that must be learned, and (b) better networked learning technologies, has resulted in a marked improvement in content design and presentation format more recently. The proof of this is that more and more employees are voluntarily using online learning to upgrade their skills and improve their prospects.

Reinforcing The on-going process of reinforcing implicit knowledge involves practicing the new skills in simulation exercises until routines are familiar, and then using the new skills in the work that is assigned. Knowledge that is not needed and skills that are not used usually are forgotten quite quickly.

10

Governments will want to consider doing a strategic analysis of the relationship between knowledge work, skills requirements, theoretical understanding, and education/training content. Is there a set of generic “knowledge worker skills” that are distinct from the specific service knowledge that a department or agency is based upon? The answer is yes, but in most cases these knowledge worker skills are just picked up informally because no provision is made to teach courses on them, or test for them. Much of the operations knowledge within governments is also conveyed informally.

An article in the Harvard Business Review shows the learning gaps that exist in many organizations.vii Anyone familiar with work in government will recognize the problem. The constant pressure for immediate performance means that there isn’t time to reflect on the implications of the situation or the lessons learned for on-going cases. Often, what is required of managers is to take the time to do the debriefing that would add to operations knowledge. In most instances, the only way that continuous improvement actually occurs is where individual workers become “reflective practitioners” and make the extra effort to review their own experiences and share the results with colleagues.

Sharing

The practice of sharing knowledge with colleagues is a good entry point into the network form of knowledge. The reason sharing is so important in government knowledge work is that no single individual possesses the combination of knowledge, skills, and authority to complete a procedure without the input of others. Part of the operations knowledge of the people in a section is their knowing how the value-chain is assembled so that throughput can be completed in an efficient and effective manner. People have got to know who contributed what to a process before the task was passed along to them, and who they in turn will pass the task along to, and for what further processing, once their own contribution is complete.

None of the collaboration will work without the constant "to-ing and fro-ing" that accompanies the workflow. Colleagues may have to explain how they arrived at a particular decision, or what the implications of that decision are for further steps in processing. This sharing helps to set the context for the entire processing of a task from beginning to end. The responsibility of managers is to create an atmosphere within the organization that promotes a willingness to share knowledge. One way of doing this is to encourage staff members to consult with their colleagues regarding problems or uncertainties rather than taking the challenge to a manager. To the extent that the group can be self-reliant regarding its knowledge needs, sharing is an indirect consequence. The World Bank is a good example of an institution that implemented, in 1997, a whole knowledge management process in order that client countries and staff members of the World Bank could share information on a continuing basis.

11

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE WORLD BANK GROUP

Overall, whatever the term employed to describe it, knowledge management is increasingly seen not merely as the latest management fashion, but as signaling the development of a more organic and holistic way of understanding and exploiting the role of knowledge in the processes of managing and doing work, and an authentic guide for individuals and organizations in coping with the increasingly complex and shifting environment of the modern economy.viii

Knowledge Management Secretariat The Washington DC-based World Bank Group provides loans and technical assistance to developing countries around the world, maintaining offices in 80 countries. As stated by one World Bank Economic Development Institute (EDI) official, "the World Bank is changing its vision of itself from that of a financial bank to that of a knowledge bank, with increasing attention given to supporting knowledge institutions in its borrowing member countries."ix Such support has a variety of dimensions, including:

• knowledge codification (i.e., so useful knowledge is not embedded in individuals);

• enhancing the learning environment (e.g., less delivery of EDI courses in Washington, and more development of local knowledge institutions);

• connectivity & networking, to take advantage of the rapid development of telecommunications and related technologies; and

• a focus on pilot countries to see how these issues fit together in practice. To achieve these objectives, the Bank appointed a six-person knowledge management secretariat whose sole responsibility became to reorganize the Bank's international activities using KM principles and to apply them internally. Among 8000 staff members there are now 500 full time and 300 part time knowledge management workers. World Bank Group President, James D. Wolfensohn, stated, in 1999, that the application of knowledge management within the organization and to all the countries the Bank deals with (especially developing countries) is more important than the lending of money.

Creating Knowledge in Developing Countries The Bank describes KM as "collecting information, connecting people and applying experience and expertise to relevant situations."x Adnan Hassan, a member of the Bank's Knowledge Management Secretariat who was interviewed on the subject of Knowledge Management, said that this activity is far more important to a developing country than the simple borrowing of money. "If you tell them how to do it, and you support them with

12

resources to get them started, then you have them on the road to prosperity and happiness. You have armed them with the capacity to succeed."xi The strong focus on the importance of knowledge and its applications, which began within the Bank in 1997, has also included renewing the skills of the organization's office workers, fine tuning strategic missions, and reorganizing the administrative structure of the Bank. To prepare for the rapid rate of change in the 21st century, the Bank is embedding a philosophy that management and sharing of knowledge should be an integral part of the institution. While the Bank has always transferred and shared knowledge, it is now viewing this process as a distinct activity, backed with specifically identified human, administrative, financial and technological resources. The World Bank staff is also becoming facilitators, as they put workers from different countries together to share particular knowledge. The Knowledge Management Secretariat is the strategic hub for the Bank's KM activities and is directed by a Knowledge Management Board. The Board, which develops and ensures implementation of the overall KM strategy, includes operational vice-presidents, support vice-presidents and other senior officials within the Bank. The Board provided the KM Secretariat with a budget of U.S. $55 million over three years (1997 – 2000).

Sharing Knowledge: Internally and Externally Bank knowledge workers themselves worked in communities that have been created throughout the institution, reflecting specific areas of expertise and responsibility, all of which report up through an administrative structure to the KM Board. Knowledge workers are expected to actively engage in knowledge sharing, including their area of research, the information libraries they have, and information concerning electronic transfer of funds and loans' activity. While the KM structure has been articulated, application has been a challenge as the Bank attempts to achieve these objectives, for example, wherever a staff member may be in the world, there should be access to the Bank’s knowledge resources. Ensuring the relevance and value of knowledge also requires obtaining information, knowledge and insights from Bank clients in various countries around the world, that are then transferred back to the Bank. Field employees are continually being taught to further this sharing concept. When a Bank employee gains some insight or knowledge in a country where he is working, he or she is encouraged to transmit this back to the appropriate person within the Bank. One of the main ways this is done is through email.

13

Facilitating Knowledge The Bank has other means of collecting and disseminating information. In order to bring people together electronically or physically and facilitate what individual staff members are trying to achieve, in addition to meetings in Washington, the Bank regularly convenes meetings through the Internet, video conferencing and other technology such as conference calls. The Bank has a distance learning studio with satellite links and other communication technologies in Washington as well as a publishing arm through which papers and a variety of other information is available. Top experts are invited by the Bank to do presentations and seminars to employees. Brown bag lunches are organized within the Bank to encourage employees to discuss various projects they are working on. Outside speakers and experts are often invited to the brown bag lunches to share their knowledge and experience with World Bank employees. Inherent in all of these activities is implicit recognition of the importance of knowledge sharing and knowledge management. Overlying this activity is the KM Secretariat’s objective of a community of practices – based on thematic groups. These are the engines for their knowledge banks. For example, within the energy, mining and telecommunications sectors, there are seven thematic groups, including one on information infrastructure, the mission of which is to promote effective implementation of telecommunications and information technology applications for poverty alleviation and social development. This thematic group is addressing such key sub-sectoral issues as telecommunications liberalization, rural telephony, networking, national information infrastructure policy development, strategic information, and systems portfolio development. The efforts of thematic groups will lead to more rapid cross-pollination of ideas between countries and cultures. This KM activity is positioning the World Bank as one of the leading creators, connectors, and facilitators of knowledge in the development community.

Changing Attitudes and Organization Despite this powerful vision backed by commitment, funding, people, and technology and administrative resources, the KM Secretariat has encountered some problems getting Bank staff to accept this new system. Problems encountered include: • resistance to change; • entrenched ideas on "how something works"; • unwillingness to share knowledge for fear of giving up some "power" one might

have; • Silo thinking – i.e., the information flows only within one division of an organization

and does not cross to other parts of the organization. To help overcome these problems in the future Bank staff will be assessed, as part of their employee evaluation, on the degree to which they are able to share knowledge. This is a broad goal, which is now only being applied in theory. The results will hinge on the

14

degree to which knowledge can be shared, and people within organizations can develop the idea that sharing is essential, both for their own careers and to further the goals of the organization and their clients. The Bank's strategy has been to organize internally first. Now the next major step will be to organize in the field in order to improve services to clients and help them to solve their problems in more effective ways. Through application of KM, the Bank believes useful knowledge will be more rapidly shared to achieve the overall goal of alleviating poverty in client countries. xii (for further details on this and other case studies see:

http://rileyis.indelta.com/publications/NewDocs/KnowledgeManagement/KM-AN-EVOLVING-DISCIPLINE.htm

Knowledge Sharing: Key Factors

The American Productivity & Quality Center (APOC) has reported on how knowledge sharing is conducted in a number of organizations.xiii Their conclusion is that there are six key factors that influence people's willingness to share knowledge:

• Knowledge-sharing must support the organization's mission; • Informal networks provide the wherewithal for knowledge sharing; • Leaders and managers must set a knowledge-sharing example; • Knowledge-sharing must fit with the overall culture; • Work arrangements must encourage knowledge-sharing; and • Knowledge-sharing must be recognized and rewarded.

Network Knowledge The concept behind network knowledge is that knowledge is distributed within groups rather than located in isolated individuals. The usual term for this is "the division of labour". A task may be composed of a number of activities each of which requires specialized skills. Since no one person is likely to have the learning capability, time, or interest to excel in the performance of all these activities, they are divided up and assigned to different people for training and performance. The result is that for the task at hand, the knowledge of component activities is distributed and complementary. Only by working together, either sequentially or simultaneously (as the activities require), can the task be completed satisfactorily. In government organizations this situation is particularly prevalent. Within departments and agencies the considerations that enter into information processing (either in-coming or out-going) can be convoluted and complicated. The result is that tasks consist of a number of specialized activities. Where authorization accompanies processing, the sequence of activities is as important as the number of them. This is a primary reason for letting work groups organize their own schedules and assignments – they are then responsible for their own performance and quality control.

15

The Washington Technology website reviews how knowledge management has gained a foothold in the U.S. Federal Government since the impact of the network form of knowledge has become recognized.xiv The speed of response, the reach of connectivity, and the need for cooperation, are all pushing governments to use knowledge management to coordinate their knowledge work and workers. For now, the push for these capabilities is coming from inside government rather than from constituents. As the infrastructure is put into place however, the capabilities of network knowledge to support public participation in the policy process will become well known and welcomed.

Capturing The network form of knowledge can pose the same problem for an organization that the tacit form poses, namely that it exists informally, in the heads and habits of people rather than as a formal record of what is known. Hence the capturing process performs the role of explicating network knowledge into an explicit form in a manner analogous to how the codifying process transforms tacit knowledge into the explicit form. Capturing is, therefore, a group process. One good example is when the regular staff meeting includes a “lessons learned” session. During such a session the synergy of collaborative work can turn into the synergy of collaborative knowledge formalization. In this type of case, the pattern of interaction (context) is just as important as the substantive knowledge relating to the task (content). New types of cooperation, or division of labour, or scheduling, or tool/technique use, or whatever, can be noted for future reference or immediate improvement. The Government of the United Kingdom has Standards and Guidance for Records Management, which covers both codifying and capturing.xv The entire process of records management from creation, through maintenance and access, to disposal, is governed by the regulations of the Public Records Act. It covers the whole range of the records management life cycle and includes records in all media. As the size of records holdings has grown, and as the expectation of availability has increased, governments around the world have adopted policies and programs with similar intentions, however different the techniques employed might be.

Distributing Once network knowledge has been rendered explicit, it can then be distributed throughout the network to whomever on the authorization list might find it useful. The problem with this opportunity is that it results in over-use, which leads to overload. Knowledge distribution through e-mail is particularly prone to this problem. E-mailboxes are often too small to store all of the messages sent between periodic retrievals. Too many messages consist of personal topics, gossip, social event coordination, etc. Another contributor to overload is the habit of forwarding messages to colleagues, or responding to messages with acknowledgements and salutations. A third

16

source of clogging the network is mass distribution of “executive” messages that don’t refer to workflow concerns at all. To manage distribution properly requires a set of “netiquette” rules. All mass-distribution messages should be posted to a website rather than addressed to individual mailboxes. A bulletin board could be made available for personal, social, and executive messages, and gossip or offensive messages should be banned. Professor Reinhard Riedl of The Department of Information Technology, University of Zurich, Switzerland has published a study of circumstances within the European Community that shows that exchange of information between governments on inter-state networks, is just as amenable to a knowledge management solution as is network knowledge exchange within governments.xvi The same kind of solution undoubtedly applies to state and/or provincial governments within federations. Wherever knowledge has to be distributed within a network of users, standards and procedures must be adopted which facilitate interoperability and manage traffic.

Circulating Network knowledge is kept available, current, and relevant by being continually circulated amongst users. “Talking shop” as often as possible, and to any colleague who will listen, is the best guarantor of keeping on top of the job. Governments are usually large enough that different department, agencies, or divisions can have distinct hardware platforms, software versions, network standards, or workflow protocols. Governing statutes and regulations, or applicable policies and programs will often also differ. This diversity of working circumstances may create some islands of knowledge, which are so remote from each other that neither contact nor learning is likely. In most cases however, there is enough commonality that trading notes can be valuable if the context of service is kept in mind. Another effect of circulating knowledge within the network is that individuals will learn about knowledge and skills that their colleagues possess that may very well come in handy in on-going circumstances. Part of the problem with network knowledge is that often “we don’t know what we know”. Colleagues may have skill sets, which can be drawn upon to meet an emergency or save on expenditures, if these capabilities are known – but personnel knowledge and skills inventories are not usually kept (or if kept, not referred to). Knowledge managers could usefully find ways to “tap into the grapevine” and glean the network knowledge that contributes to productivity. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is tracking knowledge management within its member-country governments.xvii A Report in January 2002 describes the results of a survey sent to director-level staff of ministries/ departments/agencies of member-country national governments. A substantial proportion of the questions asked concern the extent, efficiency, and effectiveness of circulating network knowledge within governmental organizations. The conclusions of the survey

17

were reported in a symposium, and they are about what would be expected – recent improvements in knowledge circulating are welcomed, but more concerted efforts are still needed.xviii

Informing The process of transferring network knowledge from the group to an individual is that of informing. The person may need to know the context of the organization, a policy, or a program, so as to know where their efforts will fit into the larger endeavour. On the other hand, the person may need to know the content of an assignment, a project, or a procedure, so as to know what activities to perform to contribute to completion of a task. In either case, the person needs to get enough information to make appropriate action possible. The transfer of this network knowledge is only effective when the recipient practices active listening. The person must ask for clarification if something doesn’t make sense, and make the knowledge their own by a process of mental modeling that fits the information into the larger conceptual structure they possess. The Treasury Board Secretariat of the Government of Canada has tried to factor this active listening into their professional development programs.xix They encourage a proactive approach, wherein public servants pick up information not only from the network of their colleagues, but from contact with their clients as well. The arrangement that produces the best results involves joint plans on the part of individuals and groups so that the workforce can upgrade its skills and the organization can handle its responsibilities.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY Given the knowledge management forms and flows as described above, what technologies have been developed to implement knowledge mobilization? As stated in the introduction, answering this question involves recognizing the relationship between functionality (the organization’s purposes) and technology (the tools to serve those purposes). Below is a summary of that relationship.xx

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY Functionality Technology

searching search engines categorizing computer languages (XML, RDF) composing office suite applications summarizing artificial intelligence storing storage media distributing networks

18

workflow groupware

Searching And Search Engines A primary challenge of knowledge management is to complete a successful search for needed information in a timely and inexpensive manner. Part of this capability involves being able to judge how much time and expense are appropriate in any given case. A variety of sources may provide different quantities and qualities of information, so there is some flexibility in deciding which source or combination to use. Government knowledge workers have sources that are both internal (within government) and external (outside government). There are often restrictions on the availability of both kinds of sources – privacy, confidentiality, and security provisions must be respected or sanctions will follow. In addition, cross-matching between databases from different departments or programs is frowned on, and often disallowed by law. Whatever the prevailing restrictions, the technology for such searches is the search engine.xxi Sizeable databases and websites often have their own search engines, so searchers can simply log on and type in their enquiry. There are also a number of excellent free search engines available on the World Wide Web that use a combination of key words and semantic parsing on the lists of web pages they search. Search engines are now so fast and powerful, that no one can do an effective search without them. Concerns have been raised that the logic built into these search engines may “limit” one’s findings within the epistemological constructs of the programmers – but search engines are so prolific that any such limits are actually welcomed, just to avoid information overload.

Categorizing and Computer Languages As the amount and types of information available continue to grow, schemes of “information architecture” must be devised to sort the material. One basis on which to sort is the file format into which the information is entered. There are word processors, spreadsheets, data tables, etc., each with a different type of file format. There are also differences between vendor brands of various applications, with WORD distinct from WORDPERFECT, or EXCEL distinct from PARADOX, etc. An entirely different basis on which to sort is on the semantics of the content. Key words in titles, word-count frequency in the body of text, and the meaning within graphics, are three of the ways to accomplish semantic sorting. The problem is that file format and semantic content are both important, but there is no necessary relationship between them. So if either one of these methods is used as the basis for information architecture, significant aspects of information identity are ignored in the categorization. With the increasing specialization of information that reflects growing complexity in the social world, not being able to use all relevant meta-data (data about data) is a real loss to knowledge managers.

19

New computer languages have now solved this problem. Every type and brand of software application with a future is being re-written in Extensible Markup Language (XML), a common format that includes meta-data as part of its background record.xxii Meta-data about every file is created with XML, providing a basis for generic viewers to access all of the kinds of file formats likely to be encountered. Resource Description Framework (RDF) is an extension of XML that handles semantic classification, and as software viewers are developed to utilize this capability as well, it will be possible to sort, store, access, and apply all information on the basis of both format and semantics.xxiii Then comparative analysis between all information sources will finally become truly possible (the knowledge manager’s dream).

Composing and Office Suite Applications As well as finding and classifying information, a further aspect of knowledge mobilization is composing new documents, whatever their contents. There has been a move in Europe to specify a computer-driving license that lists the basic software application skills a competent knowledge worker should possess. The idea is simply that those who do a significant proportion of their work on the computer should be able to operate a word processor, presentation software, a spreadsheet, and database management software well enough to complete basic assignments with them. Desirable as this may be however, it is regrettably true that the majority of knowledge workers cannot operate many of the features of most of the software applications they regularly use. Organizations, including governments, often do not have adequate resources to spend on training, with the result that most users are limited to a small range of functionality. Beyond that they must rely on printed manuals or online help for assistance in areas outside their capabilities. Because most individual and organizational users do not seem inclined to invest enough in training to ensure high competence, software designers have developed an alternative approach to promoting effective use of their Office Suite software – they are progressively standardizing and simplifying the user interfaces so that utilization of the features is intuitive and hence less training is required.xxiv All of the applications in office suites are being designed with a common look and feel so that labeling and location of buttons is the same throughout the word processor, spreadsheet, etc. Improvements in the design of Office Suites are also beginning to enable information transfer between applications, so that the promise of a “seamless web” will finally be fulfilled. These changes may be the single most important contribution to knowledge management from the information industries, because they make knowledge work “user friendly” rather than aggravating.

Summarizing and Artificial Intelligence As the volume of information increases, there just isn’t the time to attend to all of the

20

content. One response to this situation is to read a sample of incoming messages and documents, and ignore the rest. This solution is part of the tacit knowledge that more and more knowledge workers are inventing, for their own use, in order to cope with the overload. The problem with this solution is that within the messages and documents ignored, there could very likely be vital information that either needs a timely response or provides important intelligence for the performance of the job. Part of the solution to this situation is the “netiquette” practices that were mentioned earlier – putting announcements on a website rather than sending them as e-mails. This could feasibly manage the e-mail overload problem, but not the document overload problem. When a succession of documents must be read, absorbed, analyzed, critiqued or whatever, the proliferation of pages can be simply overwhelming. What makes the process especially exasperating is that after a series of documents on a topic have been read and reflected upon, it turns out that there is a lot of overlap and repetition – but there are also distinct nuances in each document. Artificial intelligence now provides a solution to this document overload problem. Those who create abstracts of articles and executive summaries of books have long realized that the substantive message of a document is covered in 20% or less of the total content – the rest is just elaboration and examples.xxv Now algorithms have been developed that condense documents down to 50%, or 25%, or 10%, or even 5% of their original length. The main word processors now have such a summarizer feature included in them, but it only handles documents in their own format. Commercial summarizers are available which handle a range of formats, including web documents. After the integrated Office Suite of applications, the summarizer will probably prove to be the most valuable tool for individual efforts in knowledge management.

Storing and Storage Media Safe and secure storage of information is crucial to ongoing organizational operations. In fact, the development of modern information technology arose from the need of the U.S. Census to analyze, store, and retrieve demographic data from their constitutionally mandated surveys. Punched cards and sorting machines as deployed by IBM lasted from the late 1800s to just after World War Two. But the replacement of mechanical analyzers with electronic ones as part of the intelligence effort during the war created the demand for an electronic medium of data storage. Originally input data was hard-wired into the computers, and output was printed on long scrolls of paper, but neither of these arrangements could keep up with the volume of data generated. Eventually plastic, magnetized tape on large spools became the storage medium of choice for large data sets. The advent of smaller computers (variously called mini, micro, desktop, or personal) necessitated cheaper and more compact storage. Floppy disks of various sizes permitted storage and transfer, and hard disks created within-computer storage. Soon tapes in a cassette size were developed for “back-up” purposes, which were followed by compact disks (CDs) and zip disks for greater density of storage. The problem with all of these

21

newer media is that as the latest medium is developed and adopted, the hardware infrastructure is converted with new media drives as quickly as costs will allow. But in the process, older storage media can no longer be read by the new technologies. So technological progress suddenly renders vast stores of data inaccessible. Sometimes the conversion to the new technology is so complete that not a single machine in an organization can be found that can access data from an older format. Just as diverse applications need “middleware” to enable them to work together, so different generations of storage media need “universal viewers” to make their content accessible regardless of the obsolescence of their formats. Until such a device is developed a lot of data in repositories is no longer accessible.xxvi Furthermore, as new media continue to be developed with even higher storage density, current floppies, CDs, and zip disks themselves face the prospect of being rendered suddenly useless. Governments already are deep into this problem. They will need to work with media developers to develop a technology policy that avoids this situation in the future. Fortunately XML can provide a basis for assured access if it is applied strategically in the future.

Distributing and Networks Distributing information can be done either openly as on the Internet, exclusively over an Intranet, or in some combination of the two as with an Extranet. From a service provider’s point of view, networks can be situated on common carriers (telephone lines), they can be isolated from outside by firewalls (a gateway between internal channels and external feeds), or they can emulate isolation even as they use common carriers (as with virtual networksxxvii). The choice between openness and isolation is a trade-off between security and cost, or between security and convenience. Security costs more money, and makes availability of outside information less convenient, but it is more secure. The damage done by viruses and hackers does illustrate the point that some protective provisions are essential. How much to spend on such protection, and how much slow-down to accept in gateway operations to outside information sources, are the perennial questions with no clear answers. Interestingly enough however, the biggest network issue currently on the table is that of “bandwidth”.xxviii Multi-media data is so much richer than plain text data that transmissions are much more sizeable. Using the pipeline analogy, the old wires and routers were so small that multi-media messages took seemingly forever to arrive. Speed has been improved and waiting-time reduced through “broadband” technology (facilitated by installing network cards in every computer and high-speed modems to every Internet connection). Governments have found this solution easy to accommodate because their networks already had both network cards and high-speed modems as part of their internal network requirements. The only way that sufficient information exchange

22

can occur between government knowledge workers is with the use of broadband networks.

Workflow and Groupware When the information processing steps and accompanying approvals were applied to paper documents moved by hand and foot, the rate at which tasks were performed was notoriously slow. As the number of tasks in government work increased due to addition of more programs, as the expectations of the public increased for more timely responses, and as the size of the public service decreased due to budgetary limits and downsizing, ways had to be found to do more with less. The concept of workflow managementxxix was discovered (or invented, if you prefer). A little historical research reveals that this new approach actually bears considerable resemblance to the “time and motion” studies of a century ago.xxx The differences are:

the work in question now is knowledge work as opposed to physical labor; workers are now encouraged to innovate rather than just imitate machines.

The result is a combination of: (1) process re-engineering, (2) collaborative software, and (3) workgroup re-organization. To provide any significant productivity gains, workflow must include all three of these new arrangements. There is a very real sense in which the entire point of knowledge management in organizations is to facilitate effective workflow through efficacious groupware.xxxi All of the other technologies simply provide the platform upon which workflow then functions. The test of whether or not any of the other technologies properly fits the organization’s knowledge management strategy is whether or not they contribute to the workflow construction of the organization’s value-chain. And the choice of upgrades or new components should also meet this operations test – reducing costs, improving service, performing reliably, delivering speedily, etc. And because this test is so simple and powerful, knowledge managers can use it with great confidence.

Forms, Flows, Functionality & Technology How does the vocabulary of forms and flows (knowledge management) fit with the functionality and technology of organizational operations (workflow)? Only very loosely. Knowledge Management is the “science” of knowledge work (just as Scientific Management was the science of physical labor). In most cases however, the practice of knowledge management has been an epiphenomenon, an add-on after the fact of organizational operations.

23

There are two aspects to the one reason why this is so: (1) KM requires the kind of rationalization that very few executives will seriously

contemplate – the exception being those executives that have their own grounding in either knowledge management or knowledge engineering.

(2) A dramatic switch from sloppy thinking to knowledge management is an extremely high-risk venture – but most knowledge management consultants insist that the transition must be revolutionary. It takes confidence, competence, and perseverance to design and implement the right plan at the right speed – the many failures and few successes attest to that.

CONCLUSION

Perhaps more than any other type of organization, governments are facing challenges of scale and scope for which knowledge management provides effective solutions. However, the top-down control currently in effect, and the working culture of bureaucratic procedures both stand in the way of explicit and widespread use of knowledge management within government. What has happened to date is the development of “islands of KM” wherever a strong director sees the benefits and has been able to negotiate some room to maneuver.

Knowledge management will not go away however, because the demands to do more with less will very probably persist. The higher up the organizational chain that there is executive support for knowledge management solutions, the quicker they will be adopted, and the wider their effects will be. When a president, prime minister, or other important cabinet minister champions KM, more concerted implementations will likely occur. Otherwise the smaller islands of KM will continue to proliferate, eventually occupying all of the information space available. The issue of Knowledge Management is, in many ways, still in its initial stages of evolution but progressing into an applicable tool for organizations. As outlined above it will be important for government departments and agencies, no matter if in a developing or developed country, to put in systems that will find ways to capture and utilize tacit, implicit and explicit knowledge within their organization. Practical applications of KM definitions will have to be found based on their unique internal structures, human and financial resources available, and the specific goals and operational requirements of the organization. It is evident that when embarking on a KM evolution, the first step will be the articulation of a strategy designed to meet the defined needs of the organization. Carefully drawn programs that then become the road map as to how KM can be implanted and applied would then follow this. Part of the writing of a program would be a determination of what technologies would be needed to achieve the KM goal. Technologies can only be identified after the strategy and programs for implementation are written. This sequence will be paramount in ensuring the success of any KM program.

24

25

When designing a program, a realistic view is vital of the human, financial and infrastructure instruments that are available to execute the program. The World Bank case above, which illustrated how that organization moved forward with KM by the setting up of a specific Secretariat with sufficient personnel, financial and infrastructure, demonstrates this point. Also, the World Bank had clearly defined their purposes and end results that were expected as to why KM was important to their institution, and structured their KM Institute accordingly. Any KM initiative, whether in a public or private organization, is a long-term activity. KM is not a quick, overnight fix to roll out knowledge to further the goals of a company or government department. There is much trial and error in the process. As noted above, and articulated in the paper, leadership, vision and commitment at the highest points of the institutions as possible, are required for long-range success. This puts the onus on those knowledge innovators in departments to make the right case as to why their programs should go forward. Commitments from the top of an organization can result in the proper allocation of funds and personnel and the acquisition of requisite technologies. Within government organizations accountability and transparency are other prime requisites. An informed senior management, who are regularly briefed on developments for the KM programs and can be shown tangible results in the long term, will continue to support the activity. This is why KM specific programs within departments that deal with very focused goals of knowledge sharing and creation, within the parameters of the mission statement and activities of that department, will more likely be guaranteed success than a sloppily drawn, overarching policy and program that are outside the ambit of their immediate department. All organizations are results driven and it is important to address this fact. In so doing planners for KM implementation to help drive programs within individual organizations will be in a position not only to meet the goals of their institutions, but to contribute to the evolution of effective and workable knowledge bases. Much has been learned about KM in the past decade. The biggest challenge ahead is devising wise choices to ensure effective application. When senior executives and managers in organizations, large and small, see tangible results in KM applications, the subject itself will gain wide acceptance. Essentially, in this time of change within governments, with the implementation of e-government and e-governance programs and moves towards engaging the citizen in online consultations, KM experts have opportunities to become agents of significant change by demonstrating their abilities to capture and apply knowledge effectively in workable and useable ways.

ENDNOTES i M.J.D. Sutton, Personal Communication ii I. Nonaka & H. Takeuchi, THE KNOWLEDGE CREATING COMPANY, HBSP, Boston, 1997 iii Eileen M. Milner MANAGING INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR Routledge, London, 2000

26

iv CTG, BUILDING INTERORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS, http://www.ctg.albany.edu/knowledge_networks.html v I.E. Wilson, YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS, http://www.iog.ca/publications/you_must_remember.pdf vi Michael Welber, “Government Departments Embrace Learning Alternatives” in e-Learning online, http://www.elearningmag.com/elearning/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=3888 vii A. Tucker, A. Edmondson & S. Spear, “Why Your Organization Isn’t Learning All It Should” in Harvard Business Review online, http://hbsworkingknowledge.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=2397&t=knowledge&sid=2398&pid=0 viii Stephen Denning, Director, Knowledge Management, World Bank, What is Knowledge Management?, publication of World Bank Knowledge Management Board, Washington, D.C., 1998. P.6. ix Notes from Small States Conference, Session 4, Knowledge Management and Capacity Building, comments by Mr. Ishac Diwan, St. Lucia, February 17-19, 1999. x Making Development Knowledge Available and Accessible for Clients, partners and Staff, brochure on KM produced by the World bank Group. P.4. xi Interview with Adnan Hassan, member of the World Bank Group’s Knowledge Management Secretariat and one of the first knowledge workers in the Bank. Interview, World Bank Group Headquarters, Washington, D.C., May 10, 1999. xii Note: these case studies below are based on interviews with employees of the World Bank in Washington, D.C. These are excerpts from a paper produced by this author for the National Research Council in July, 2000. xiii APOC, CREATING A KNOWLEDGE-SHARING CULTURE, APOC, Houston, 1999 xiv Trish Williams, “Knowledge Management Initiatives Gain Foothold in Government” in Washington Technology online, http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/15_23/features/16111-1.html xvGovernment of the United Kingdom, “Standards for Management of Public Records”, in Public Records Office online, http://www.pro.gov.uk/recordsmanagement/standards/introduction.htm xvi Reinhard Riedl, KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR INTERSTATE E-GOVERNMENT, University of Zurich website, http://www.ifi.unizh.ch/egov/Sienanew.pdf xvii PUMA/HRM, SURVEY ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, OECD website, http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00033000/M00033153.pdf xviii OECD, SYMPOSIUM ON THE LEARNING GOVERNMENT, OECD website, http://www.oecd.org/oecd/pages/home/displaygeneral/0,3380,EN-document-0-nodirectorate-no-26-36617-0,00.html xix Training & Development Canada, CONTINUOUS LEARNING IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE OF CANADA, TBS, Ottawa, 1994 xx R. Strum & W. Bumpus, FOUNDATIONS OF APPLICATION MANAGEMENT, Wiley, Toronto, 1999 xxi W.H. Inmon et al, EXPLORATION WAREHOUSING, Wiley, New York, 2000 xxii Kevin Dick, XML: A Manager’s Guide, Addison-Wesley, London, 2000 xxiii Johan Hjelm, CREATING THE SEMANTIC WEB WITH RDF, Wiley, New York, 2001 xxiv Dimitris N. Chorafas, VISUAL PROGRAMMING TECHNOLOGY, Mc-Graw-Hill, New York, 1997 xxv Dan Sullivan, DOCUMENT WAREHOUSING AND TEXT MINING, Wiley, New York, 2001 xxvi Claire Tristram, “Data Extinction”, in TECHNOLOGY REVIEW Magazine, Cambridge, Oct/2002 xxvii Bruce Perlmutter, VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORKING, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle Rive, 2000 xxviii Jason Wolf & Natalie Zee, THE LAST MILE, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001 xxix Will van der Aalst & Kees van Hee, WORKFLOW MANAGEMENT, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2002 xxxRalph M. Barnes, WORK METHODS MANUAL, Wiley, New York, 1944 xxxiDave Chaffey, GROUPWARE, WORKFLOW AND INTRANETS: Reengineering the Enterprise with Collaborative Software, Digital Press, Boston, 1998