KM Toolkit Task Team Update Global Health Knowledge Collaborative Meeting September 13, 2016 Sarah Harlan – CCP Simone Parrish – CCP

KM Toolkit Task Team Met at the last GHKC meeting to discuss process of updating KM Toolkit Decided on a parallel effort: Review Toolkit analytics for the past year Conduct survey on knowledge needs of KM practitioners

Analytics: General Impressions Very wide range of traffic—some resources not viewed at all Top = over 2,000 views of a single resource 8 out of 60 sections had more than 500 views/downloads 25 out of 60 sections had fewer than 100 total views/downloads 90% of participants said they help colleagues share information or knowledge with each other 80% said they help manage or improve information systems to support the work of their colleagues 61% are “very experienced in KM” (26% have “some experience”; 13% are “new to KM”) 67% have KM as an official part of their job description; an additional 27% are program managers who want to understand KM better for their projects

Analytics: Traffic Proportion by Section Remaining 14%: (4%) (4%) (3%) (2%) (1%) What really stood out to me here: The “Operationalizing KM” landing page gets a lot of pageviews, but then people don’t drill down into most of the sections. I think the “Getting Started” and “Operationalizing KM” headers are obscuring some of their subsections, and we should lift those up to the top level. “Operationalizing KM” is a bit odd: A lot of people hit the landing page, but most of the sub-sections and resources under it have very low traffic. The section as a whole gets a massive artificial boost due to two outliers (which I’ll talk about in a bit).

Analytics: Least Popular Sections About / History Making the Case / Statistics Operationalizing KM: Behavior change communication strategies Communities of practice eLearning Social media Training and facilitation techniques Measuring the Impact of CoPs KM Professional Development / Communities of practice and listservs Useful Technologies for KM Practitioners BCC, CoPs, eLearning, Social Media, and training and facilitation—all buried under “Operationalizing KM” Survey respondents called out strategy, internal KM advocacy, and training as specific needs—let’s use their language? CoP information is buried/split up across multiple sections. I think if we unify it under one top-level page, more people might see it.

Analytics: Interesting Outliers Least viewed: Knowledge, Policy and Power in International Development Tips for Trainers Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice Chapter 4 (of what?): Linking Research to Action World Report on Knowledge for Better Health Measuring the impacts of knowledge management Some of these, I think, suffer from their titles: The first one sounds overtly political. The second sounds broad and vague. But “Measuring the impacts of knowledge management” sounds right up our audience’s alley, and it’s not too buried. Is the intro boring? Is it not relevant to our audience?

Analytics: Interesting Outliers Disproportionately high Clicks: “A Tool for Sharing Internal Best Practices” : More than 2,000 views “European Guide to good Practice in Knowledge Management - Part 4: Guidelines for Measuring KM”: More than 1,100 views

Survey Results – KM expertise 90% of participants said they help colleagues share information or knowledge with each other 80% said they help manage or improve information systems to support the work of their colleagues 61% are “very experienced in KM” (26% have “some experience”; 13% are “new to KM”) 67% have KM as an official part of their job description 90% of participants said they help colleagues share information or knowledge with each other 80% said they help manage or improve information systems to support the work of their colleagues 61% are “very experienced in KM” (26% have “some experience”; 13% are “new to KM”) 67% have KM as an official part of their job description; an additional 27% are program managers who want to understand KM better for their projects

Survey Results – KM Work The following elements are most central to participants’ work: Knowledge sharing & communication (90%) Knowledge capture & organization (87%) Knowledge generation & synthesis (81%) Developing a KM strategy (68%) Defining roles & responsibilities of KM teams (55%) Measuring KM (52%) These are the elements participants named as most central to their KM work – in order - these all received more than 50% ”yeses”

Survey Results – KM Responsibilities Great majority said ”yes” to each of following responsibilities: Managing/improving information systems to support colleagues’ work (71%) Training/providing access to learning resources for colleagues (87%) Helping colleagues share information/knowledge with each other (94%) Sustaining communities of colleagues/partners who share interests or a common goal (67%) Working to preserve access to documentation of the organization’s history (73%

Survey Results – KM Behavior Most participants (68%) have used the KM for Health and Development Toolkit Other places they go – or recommend – to look for KM information & tools: KM4Dev World Bank USAID Learning Lab NASA Knowledge Toolbox APQC K4Health Google KSToolkit.org

Survey Results – KM Behavior Favorite KM resources (esp. those published since 2011): World Bank’s Art of Knowledge Exchange Nick Milton – Writing a KM Strategy Collaboration Mapping Tool from USAID Learning Lab

Discuss: Match Toolkit Structure to Practitioner Needs? Identifying knowledge and information needs Gathering knowledge from colleagues and stakeholders Organizing information Sharing documented insights and lessons learned Evaluating and measuring KM program success I have a handout!