SHARING YOUR CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE The Case for KM in the Public Sector CARLA SAPSFORD NEWMAN

WHY DOES THE PUBLIC SECTOR NEED KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT? According to a 2005 high-level study on the Irish Civil Service: Public sector organisations are typically thought to have come later to the concept of knowledge management. However, in response to ever-increasing pressure to improve effectiveness, together with a growing awareness of the importance of sharing knowledge across government organisations to maintain a whole-of- government perspective on policy making and service delivery, knowledge management has been given greater priority. How is this relevant to you?

THE TURNOVER PROBLEM KM is not just about know-how, but know-who. And in organisations with high turnover rates, every time an associate or senior legal officer leaves, they take their knowledge with them For every year of experience, it can take up to a year of retraining of new staff Without capturing what your colleagues know, when they leave it is as if their work never existed at all. IF YOU CAN’T FIND IT, YOU CAN’T USE IT.

AREN’T YOU LUCKY Very few organisations, particularly in the public sector, have the luxury of a KM team who dedicates all their time to thinking about how to help you do your job better. You work in a knowledge industry. Knowledge is power. So if you can’t manage your knowledge, you effectively diminish your power to do your job effectively.

THIS IS A LONG-TERM CHANGE JOURNEY But it’s not a passive, one-way street. It’s like the difference between dating and marriage. Dating is short-term, just for fun, only when it’s convenient. Marriage is a long-term proposition. So your KM team is looking at a one-stop shop of information, where you won’t have to trawl through different confusing databases to find where something is. Although the migration to the old to new system won’t always be seamless, it was designed with your needs in mind. And only with your participation – and inputs – will it ultimately be successful.

ISN’T IT THE BOSS’S PROBLEM? Most employees, whether in the civil or public sector, think that their bosses are paid the big bucks to know stuff. And most employees think it’s not their problem if their boss doesn’t know the stuff he or she should know. BUT… When the boss looks bad, you look bad. Sharing knowledge – and the right knowledge at the right time to the right people – is everyone’s job in a functional organisation.

THE IMPORTANCE OF TAGGING AND BEING TAGGED Currently, when you conduct a search for a document on a particular issue, what are your chances for success? Low? Medium? High? So what’s going to change? With a new KM system, you will be better able to find what you’re looking for. But there’s a catch.

THE SYSTEM ONLY WORKS WHEN YOU WORK IT In other words, only if you work with the new system – and contribute to it – will it be useful. If your KM colleagues build a system and you don’t contribute to it, its worth to you will be less. So tagging your documents in the future will be key. It’s kind of like voting. If you don’t vote, you can’t complain about the result, can you? So every time you upload a key document and don’t tag it, you are wasting someone else’s valuable time. And every time someone else doesn’t tag a document potentially useful to you, they are wasting your valuable time. It’s as simple as that.

AUSTRALIAN ATTORNEY GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT Recommendations 2012 Report ‘Review of Legislative Practices & Processes’ The AGD should give consideration to developing a Departmental wide Knowledge Management system for legislation (primary and subordinate). This system would draw on information that already exists in ComLaw and link to other information held in the Department. The system would include all relevant information and material including recording and monitoring future activities, key dates, responsible officer and review provisions. This central Knowledge Management system would need to be regularly maintained and updated. At pre-determined intervals individual officers responsible should be required to certify that the database is up to date and complete. It would be incumbent upon staff responsible for each piece of legislation to keep the information up to date and on a reasonably regular basis they could also be required to certify that they have reviewed all the information and that the database is up to date.

OECD STUDY ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR 2003 INCENTIVE PROBLEM Government organisations have different incentives, strengths and weaknesses compared to private companies in relation to the management of knowledge. Competitiveness looks different, but is no less important. Incentives to improve efficiency, reduce time spent on work and lowering overall costs are still crucial. Outcomes, however, can be less clear and more difficult to measure (in a private company, profits are always the bottom line). Management structures tend to be hierarchical, which can provide fewer incentives for innovation and teamwork.

OECD STUDY CONCLUSIONS KM is core to the management agenda of a majority of central government organisations across member countries – and they were making concrete efforts to improve their KM practices. Cultural change was taking place, for example that sharing knowledge was less being equated with loss of power. Yet despite these changes, the most difficult challenge facing knowledge sharing was that these organisations underestimated the ‘human factor’ in their efforts to improve knowledge practices. KM strategies have often not been well disseminated and rewards for knowledge-sharing remained informal and limited. Silo structures remained a problem to enhanced organisational learning. After a major survey of KM practices in 2002 in the central governments of member states, the OECD concluded:

Despite the increasing difficulties in measuring results, the activities of governments are knowledge intensive, with the need to maintain a whole-of- government perspective an important consideration. For reasons of wider public interest, access to knowledge and transparency is critical. Increased staff turnover, particularly in knowledge-intensive departments, creates new challenges for the preservation of institutional memory and the training of new staff. OECD STUDY 2003

SO WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU? How much is your time worth? If you took your annual salary, and divided it by month, week, day and hour, how much is an hour of your time worth? By contributing to a knowledge management system, you may think, you are wasting your time. GEE, IN THE HALF HOUR IT TOOK TO TAG THOSE DOCUMENTS, I COULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTING RESEARCH, GETTING A NICE HAWKER LUNCH…

SO WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU? But wait. That half hour of your time potentially saved a colleague days or weeks of work, replicating your brain power. And if a colleague spends that half an hour, he or she is potentially saving YOU days or weeks of work. And potential embarrassment. For every time you come up with a decision or legal brief that duplicates a colleagues, you potentially make one or both of you look a little foolish.

WORLDWIDE PUBLIC SECTOR CASE STUDIES CONCLUDE… Without public servants like you participating in knowledge sharing, no KM strategy will have a chance to succeed. It’s up to you!

THANK YOU! CARLA SAPSFORD NEWMAN