Two New York City police officers help an injured woman away from the lobby at the World Trade Center after the February 26, 1993 terrorist bombing (AP Photo)

“Security experts admit the US disaster could have occurred because of a lack of technology needed to analyse and integrate data from disparate sources. Federal officials are now investigating the future use of business intelligence and enterprise application integration (EIA) technologies”

INFOWORLD 13 September 2001

Columbia’s Lesson

"The findings of the commission were quite clear and symptomatic of what happens in organizations."

Jorge Lopez, VP of cross-industry research at GartnerG2. Columbia Accident Investigation Board

Recommendations from the Gartner G2

•  Executives: Be humble. Face difficult situations with candor. Seek and listen to input, test assumptions, objectively assess situations and develop scenarios.

•  Use proven criteria for systematically involving those with the relevant information, expertise, and perspective in decisions, with disciplined problem solving.

•  Establish a process, culture and system for knowledge management to insure usable and accessible institutional learning and memory to support crucial decisions.

MIT Technology Review (March 2003) says the CIA, FBI and other intelligence agencies can’t “connect the dots” because of their:

•  well known inability to communicate

•  analysts’ out of date tool kits

•  insistence on obtaining their own intelligence and buying their own technology.

As a result:

•  Not a significant fraction of the $38 billion annual budget for homeland defense goes toward building information sharing capacity or analysis integration.

•  We have not yet begun to mobilize our society’s strengths in information, intelligence and technology.

If only we had this…

And we started doing this….

We could achieve this…

1.  Establishing institutional and constituency objectives.

2.  Enterprise strategies for getting there – without delay…

3.  …..shattering the stovepipes.

4.  Learning to use the tools, technologies, work and program development and delivery practices that we have developed and acquired.

5.  Becoming more adaptive and responsive to need.

Bottom Line: We don’t need yet more linear, single process, non-interoperable “solutions” that deal only with what has been

An effective national security program may demand at a shared level:

What shared and integrated policing looks like, and demands •  Shared purposes

•  Linked or aligned missions, mandates and programs

•  Common and compatible business / operational models and processes

•  Defined relationships (who works with whom, and how)

•  Shared information and knowledge, with rules to govern that sharing

•  Common or compatible methods and the systems supporting those methods

•  Shared standards in technology, equipment and data

n  Business structure and function

n  Relationship Management

n  Knowledge Management n  Methods

n  Systems and data

IT - nuts, bolts, plastic and pipes that - in the hands of people - and well managed - can be useful in helping operations and

program delivery.

IM - useful information products gathered and shared to help support operations, or

gathered as a result of operations.

KM - managing personal and organizational know-how so that relationships (of all

kinds) get identified, and used so that the quality of decision-making goes up.

KM beyond tools and artifacts Simply stated, Knowledge Management is about what needs to be known to achieve organizational objectives, and the relationships and decision-making that go into realizing those objectives.

KM is not about product management, tools and

transport. That is the domain of IM/IT.

Potential Finding: Personal Knowledge n  Issue: significant level of uncertainty around risk

management, liabilities, potential consequences

n  Solution: u  Institute a risk management system u  Create a form u  Give everyone a set of manuals. Punish the unknowing,

the uncaring and those who fail u  Institute regular lectures, CBTs, training and

certification, conference attendance u  Encourage people to talk about the issues: reward

individual enquiry and learning, success stories

Potential Finding: Organizational Knowledge n  Issue: don’t know who does what, who is related

to whom

n  Solution: u Build a portal u Buy an expertise locator system u Publish an employee newsletter u Give everyone an org chart u Turn Intranet into a chat forum u Have people introduce themselves

KM’s Key Stakeholders n  The data, information, and technology functions;

Human Resources, training and OD. u Functions that have a real strategic need to

know and are striving for business alignment and responsiveness

n  Governance. The structures and processes related to organizational decision-making.

n  Ethics and Transparency. Managing the organization in a manner consistent with legal requirements, good management practices and in a manner that is open to partners and stakeholders.

Knowledge

What one has, when information, people and process are brought together for

effective application in helping achieve results.

The enterprise-wide definition, establishment, operation and continuous improvement of the organization and its capability; its information and knowledge; and its collaborative information technologies – all directed towards ensuring the organization remains firmly focused on operational effectiveness.

Knowledge Management should be seen as….

KPMG’s 2002/03 European KM Survey (top 500 orgs in UK, France, Germany, Netherlands)

•  KM is used by these organizations to:

•  Realize synergies between units (83%)

•  Accelerate innovation (63%)

•  Achieve higher customer added value (74%)

•  Reduce costs (67%)

•  Improve quality (70%)

•  Reduce risk exposure (26%)

•  50% report clear financial benefits

KPMG’s 2002/03 European KM Survey (top 500 orgs in UK, France, Germany, Netherlands) •  50% of these companies spend up to 2%

of their budget on Knowledge Management.

•  6% spend between 4% and 8% of their budget on KM

•  78% believe they are currently missing out on business opportunities by failing to successfully exploit available knowledge.

Some KM practitioners feel that,

�˜ KM is embedded in (communities of) practice – It is the way we do things. It is not an 'add-on'. You become a ‘knowledge centered’ organization.

�˜ Everyone does KM - from mail rooms to board rooms and police officers to city hall.

�˜ Much of what is important in KM cannot be measured and trying to make it measurable means we pay attention to the wrong things

�˜  We understand better what KM is not: it is neither simply ‘improved communications’, ‘better training’, nor ‘new technology’.

Army Home Page

Army Knowledge Online

Data Sharing Initiative

Army Flow Model

•  Averages 65,000 visits per day

•  The Army’s Public Website

•  27,000 + Users

•  The Army’s Intranet

•  In use at HQDA and the Army Force Management School

•  37 Army databases consolidated by DISC4

AKO Pilot Projects

Personnel Finance Staff Officer’s Knowledge Tool

PEO C3S Data

Context Information

Analysis / Inference Intelligence

Professional Judgment

Knowledge Decision Packaging

Transform the Institutional Army into an information-age, networked organization that leverages its intellectual capital to better organize, train, equip, and maintain a strategic land combat Army Force.

AKO Vision

AFM Is A Core Component of AKO

Actionable Decisions

HQDA Data Sharing Initiative

SOURCE

FORCES Specialized

Business Views (Synchronized Data) Integrated Data Operational Data

U.S. Government KM Spending is increasing…………… ….investment spending on KM at annual rate of 9% from 2003 to 2008. (From initial investment of $820 million to $1.3 billion). At the time of 9/11, information sharing among federal agencies was limited. Department of Homeland Security charged with changing that. Significant investments expected in Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Justice

Goals for boosting spending in the KM area include:

‑ More efficient distribution of information among federal agencies ‑ Administration's push to consolidate redundant systems for e‑government. ‑ Mining of the massive amounts of data from agencies' data warehouses and getting it to the relevant parties who can then extract actionable information.

Coordinates