Just let me add something: for most people who have been involved
with the traditional KM approach for a while, klogs usually sound
like an amateur solution. You know, they do all the things they
criticize on the usual corporate environment, like being stuck on the
tradition, avoid accepting new solutions, etc.
I was just thinking: perhaps if we understand (as I know some of us
already do) klogs as tools to leverage innovation, learning and
adaptation on organizations dealing with unstable environments, it
would be easier to have them accepted in companies. Maybe klogs
shouldn´t be sold as "the tool" for knowledge management, but as ways
to foster chaordic adaptative systems.
--- In klogs@y..., "John Robb" <jrobb@u...> wrote:
> Dear K-Loggers,
> One thing I found with new KM projects is the tendency to dive into
complexity. In other words: these projects attempt to slice and
dice available knowledge in so many ways that it is almost impossible
to understand. This, in my view, can tank a project.
> My recommendation: Start simple. Get that working and then add
complexity when there is demand for it.