1. Chapter 7 Developing a Core Knowledge Framework

2. Learning Objectives Define core knowledge
List the three phases of developing a core knowledge framework
Describe core business of an organisation and its knowledge requirements
Analyse a business to identify the knowledge domain

3. Learning Objectives (cont'd)
5. Outline why knowledge capabilities can influence core knowledge
6. Construct a definition of core knowledge for an organisation
Explain issues that need to be considered when designing a core knowledge policy

4. Learning Objectives (cont'd)
Examine potential challenges associated with mapping core knowledge in an organisation
Identify issues that may need to be resolved when developing a knowledge repository
Outline issues likely to arise over content authorship

5. Today’s focus: What is core knowledge?
Why is it important to clarify the scope and nature of core knowledge?
What are some of the likely issues which may arise when building a content management system?
These questions can be used to focus students at the beginning, and to encourage reflection and discussion at the end. They draw together the key points from the text.
The lecturer may wish to pose one or several of these questions at various points during the session.

6. Introduction Most organisations face a knowledge glut
Many apply a ‘kitchen sink’ approach to providing access to knowledge
This can prevent useful application of knowledge
The goal of knowledge management is to facilitate ready access to critical knowledge when people need it
Introduction, page 169.
Many organisations generate enormous amounts of data, information and knowledge. In many cases, these are represented or accessed via WebPages or other common channels, but they provide a glut of information which is difficult to navigate or even identify. Frequently there is a tendency to include everything – the kitchen sink approach. This actually reduces the capacity to use that knowledge as the individual needs to spend most of the time searching for likely sources, rather than using those sources.
This session will explore how the knowledge system enables effective achievement of the knowledge management goal, that is, to facilitate ready access to critical knowledge when people need it.

7. Introduction (cont'd) Content management
Vital to effective knowledge management
Identifies and categorises valued knowledge (today’s session)
Manages and maintains the currency and accessibility of that knowledge (Session 8)
Page 169
This session explores one of two functions of content management: the identification and clarification of valued knowledge. It reviews how the relative importance of knowledge sources can be verified, and how they may then be categorised to meet knowledge users’ requirements – regardless of their location, role or level of appointment.
The second aspect of content management, which relates to maintenance and management of the resultant knowledge repository will be explored in the next session.

8. Core Knowledge
Strategic or operational knowledge which contributes to essential organisational processes or outcomes
Long-term value to the organisation
Enables high performance on core activities
Justifies the cost of knowledge capture and management
Minimises duplication, misinformation and redundant effort
LO1, Page 170
Many organisations fail to clarify what knowledge is important to their business. This can reduce employee capacity, opportunity or desire to share professional knowledge with others.
Core knowledge is strategic or operational knowledge that contributes to essential organisational processes or outcomes. It
supports the essential focus and activities of the business;
has long-term value to the organisational activities;
enables higher performance in core activities for the organisation;
justifies the cost of capture and management of that knowledge; and
minimises duplicated, misinformed or redundant effort on the part of knowledge workers.

9. The Three Phases of Managing Core Knowledge
Knowledge management relies on an effective content management system (CMS)
The CMS is developed progressively:
Phase 1: clarify the core knowledge scope
Phase 2: define core knowledge parameters
Phase 3: develop the core knowledge structure
LO2, page 170.
Knowledge management needs to draw together the many different expert sources which are held within the community. The Content Management System (CMS) provides the structure to identify and link those knowledge sources.
However, the challenge is to clarify what is regarded as “expert” or “valuable” and what is less useful long terms. The CMS needs to focus on the knowledge that is regarded as core knowledge.
In order to clarify the nature of the core knowledge for an organisation, three phases of development are required.
Phase 1: clarify the core knowledge scope
Phase 2: define core knowledge parameters
Phase 3: develop the core knowledge structure
Each of these steps will be discussed in turn.

10. Phase 1: Clarify Core Knowledge Scope
Explores the types of core knowledge found in the organisation and the ways in which that knowledge is used
Clarifies the nature of the core business which is undertaken
Determines the knowledge domain to be supported and encouraged
Ensures staff have the capabilities to use that knowledge
Page 171
The first phase, clarifying the core knowledge scope, explores the types of core knowledge employed in the organisation.
This is undertaken by first clarifying the nature of the core business, that operates in the firm. Core business relates to the organisational activities and priorities which require accurate and comprehensive knowledge.
Once this is clarified, the knowledge domain, that is, the business areas which are supported and actively encouraged can be determined. This helps to define the overall coverage that the core knowledge should support.
Then the capacity of staff to share and generate that knowledge can be reviewed.
This phase of the process therefore identifies what needs to be preserved and shared for future knowledge work that enhances the business activities.
The next slides examine each of these slides in some detail.

11. Phase 1: Clarify Core Knowledge Scope (cont'd)
Identifying the core business and its knowledge requirements
What are the major organisational activities?
Where is the firm going?
Is there specialised or unique knowledge?
Which knowledge needs to be shared?
Can the costs of sharing be recouped through the use of that knowledge?
What are the benefits of enabling the use of the knowledge by others?
LO3, Page 172 – 173; Figure 7.1, part 1, page 171, figure 7.2, page 173.
Each organisation generates a different core knowledge composition, depending on its historical, functional and strategic work practices. A useful way to define the core business knowledge requirements is to consider how knowledge is applied and integrated into the work activities.
Figure 7.2 on page 171 of the text offers some useful questions to consider in clarifying what should be preserved and shared. Some of these questions are briefly highlighted here, but there are also others in the text.
The questions highlight the importance of clarifying the nature of the business and the knowledge that is necessary to support the identified business priorities. Different stakeholders may perceive the business quite differently, and this will need to be further explored.
Once the core business has been clearly identified in terms of knowledge requirements, it can be defined. This is step 2.

12. Phase 1: Clarify Core Knowledge Scope (cont'd)
Define the knowledge domain
Areas of knowledge that support the core business strategy of the organisation
Each organisation develops a different knowledge domain
Knowledge which members need to share and use as common resources
Knowledge which is strategic and needs to be developed and cultivated over time
LO4, page 173 – 174; Figure 7.1, part 1, page 171,
The knowledge domain comprises areas of knowledge that support the core business strategy of the organisation.
Each organisation develops a different knowledge domain, depending on its activities, client base, shareholder expectations and historical base.
Two types of knowledge are commonly generated across an organisation. The first is knowledge which members need to share and use as common resources. This basic knowledge may be commonly shared and applied by many different people, and often appears as explicit knowledge in systems and records.
The second form of organisational knowledge is strategic and needs to be developed and cultivated over time. In many cases, this may be the tacit knowledge which is harder to capture.
The identification of the knowledge domain can be undertaken by examining a range of sources, such as job descriptions, project and sectional plans, strategic and operational plans, professional resources, and many other forms of business process.
Ultimately, the organisation needs to build a strong definition of the main elements which should be supported through knowledge management. Page provides an example of a general practice knowledge domain. The elements include:
GP medical practice and theory;
Patient case management
Specialist doctors available for referral;
Customer relationship management; and
Business management and administration.
(The students may like to consider what a university’s knowledge domain comprises. Hopefully they will identify teaching, research and service as the overarching concepts with smaller elements under these…)

13. Phase 1: Clarify Core Knowledge Scope (cont'd)
Review knowledge capabilities
Identification of desired capabilities, valuable sources of knowledge, demonstrable capabilities and knowledge practices
What do our employees really know?
What should they know?
How can they gain this knowledge?
LO5, Page 174 – 175.
The definition of core knowledge and the knowledge domain also needs to ensure staff are capable of using that knowledge. For example, if a particular database offers major benefits in interrogating business knowledge, can staff use it? (The lecturer might like to ask for a show of hands regarding the student’s experience in using pivot tables… this technique reduces time in using valued data, but may be largely undeveloped in many staff.)
Thus, there is a need to identify the desired capabilities, valuable sources of knowledge, demonstrable capabilities and knowledge practices to determine gaps and issues that may hamper knowledge practices. These will need to be addressed if the knowledge domain is to be fully reflected in practice.
Three key questions need to be asked:
What do our employees really know?
What should they know?
How can they gain this knowledge?
A range of analyses can be undertaken to find the answers to these questions. Some sources of evidence include:
Errors, accidents and mistakes
Analysis of work roles
Sample work tasks
Expert sources
From these three steps, the core knowledge scope should be clarified and defined.
It is important that this scope is generally supported by members of the organisation before the process continues, as this is the scaffolding on which the later steps build.

14. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters
Defines and builds policies relating to the core knowledge domain identified in phase 1
Provides boundaries for the core knowledge to be supported in the KMS
Ensures relevant contributions to the system, and appropriate use of the system
Still accommodates evolving requirements
Figure 7.1, page 171, text, pages 171, 175
The next stage aims to provide more guidance on the scope of the system in practice. This is the phase where the core knowledge is defined and policies and guidelines relating to both contribution and use are developed. In effect, this stage provides boundaries for the core knowledge to be supported in the KMS. It should ensure consistency and common principles apply across the organisation.
It ensures relevant contributions to the system, and appropriate use of the system.
The system also needs to accommodate evolving requirements across the organisation. This means any definitions and guidelines need to be sufficiently open to allow for changes and shifts in core business over time.

15. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters (cont'd)
Defining core knowledge
Clear definition of what is important
Directs employee attention and resources to that knowledge
Should reflect the capacity to manage, contribute to and resource the resultant domain
May commence with a very tight focus and then expand as time progresses
Page 175 – 176.
Once the core knowledge scope has been defined, a written definition greatly assists in building commitment across the organisation – in terms of the structural systems that are implemented, and the actual knowledge activities which are undertaken. The written definition also assists with building the CMS as it clarifies what should be identified and captured in the knowledge management process.
When defining the core knowledge at this stage, it is critical that the definition be realistically framed. The organisation needs to be sure that it can manage the various forms of knowledge which are identified, that employees can contribute that form of knowledge and that the scope is sufficiently limited to be readily maintained.
In many cases, it is wise to commence with a very tight focus and to then progressively widen the focus as the initial core is consolidated and strengthened.

16. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters (cont'd)
Categories of core knowledge:
Basic core knowledge: essential knowledge generated, shared and accessed by all staff
Strategic core knowledge: limited access, progressive development, needs updating
Developmental core knowledge: potentially beneficial, but still under development
Page
Three types of knowledge may be identified while defining core knowledge. These reflect the stage of development and level of applicability across staff members.
The three areas are:
Basic core knowledge: essential knowledge generated, shared, accessed by all staff. This can be seen as knowledge which has widespread application, and which can be greatly enriched and enhanced by contributions from members. Knowledge of this type might focus on customers, markets, products and operational units. They reflect a desire to avoid duplication and to learn from others rather than starting from scratch.
Strategic core knowledge: reflects more specialised knowledge sets which may be found across the organisation. Generally, access to this knowledge is often limited, partly because much of it may be tacit in nature. It also undergoes progressive development and needs regular updating. In many cases, the knowledge is held by an individual, rather than within a system. The CMS may therefore identify those who hold that knowledge, rather than the knowledge itself.
Developmental core knowledge: is still under development but potentially beneficial to the community. Because it is innovation in operation, it is often not in a suitable state to capture and record. Instead, knowledge of this nature may need to be noted as existing, as it shapes and reshapes into either basic or strategic knowledge. In some cases, it may be discarded as unsuitable after due testing and consideration. This form of knowledge should not be captured in detail within the CMS as the costs of capture, documentation and management will not be recovered: the knowledge is too volatile.
KM Viewpoint 7.1 (Page 177) provides some examples of the ways in which different firms have defined their core knowledge. Of note is the different ways in which places define their business. Siemens, for example, focus on customers, products, service, knowledge management, and sales. Law firms might emphasise know-how relating to law processes and cases, and customer knowledge. An oil and gas firm like Schlumberger emphasise projects, research and expertise and new strategies across their engineering activities.

17. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters (cont'd)
Defining the core — practical considerations:
Absorptive capacity of the individuals
Will there be sufficient return on the investment costs of capturing, recording and maintaining knowledge?
Does the increased management add value?
Can the system be maintained?
Will the KMS make the knowledge more accessible?
Page 178.
Absorptive capacity describes the capacity of knowledge users to draw and retain knowledge from the different sources they access. If they have too much choice, they will not be able to cope with the range. This is what we experience when we search the Internet: we generally give up before the choices are fully explored. In a knowledge system, this needs to be recognised and guarded against. The KMS needs to be quite strategic and targeted in terms of what it covers. Users mustn’t be overwhelmed by too much choice. They need to be assured that each option is highly useful.
Furthermore, there is also a need to look at the issue practically. If a knowledge element is already readily available and easy to access, retrieve and interrogate using established systems, will its inclusion in the KMS provide any benefit? Will it add value to what already exists, or simply duplicate that other knowledge base?
Another issue relates to the maintenance of the knowledge included in the CMS. If it is regularly changed and altered, can it be maintained sufficiently?
On the other hand, sometimes knowledge is hard to locate in an organisation. An important question is whether the enhanced structural management of the CMS will assist with creating stronger accessibility.
As the text notes, many organisations will choose to refine their core knowledge further: so that knowledge which is more difficult to locate and retrieve, and which is perhaps, more strategic in nature, is emphasised.
Thus, core knowledge may be broken into two categories: that which is accessible via normal established channels, and that which requires more dedicated support and management through the knowledge repository and other CMS processes.

18. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters (cont'd)
Develop the core knowledge policy
Describes the nature of core knowledge
Clarifies importance and value of knowledge
Outlines the roles of various stakeholders
Provides guidance on the overall principles to be applied
Policies do not normally include procedures and practice — these are contained in guidelines which can change as required
LO7, page 179.
Knowledge policies clarify the importance of the core knowledge, outline the responsibilities of various stakeholders and the overall principles which should be followed.
They do not describe the processes which will be put in place. Instead, they operate as a framework to help people understand what is expected, and the principles by which the system will operate.
While processes may evolve over time, or be replaced totally, well formulated policies should maintain their relevance and currency over a long period. They need to be relatively stable, as staff will use them to determine how they shape their work roles and activities.

19. Phase 2: Define Core Knowledge Parameters (cont'd)
Some policy considerations
What, how and when will employees share their core knowledge?
Policy implementation
Relationship with other organisational processes and systems?
Confidential, competitive knowledge
Ephemeral strategic knowledge management
LO7, Pages 179 – 182.
The policy development process will raise a number of issues which should be carefully considered. For example, the first question, What, how and when will employees share their core knowledge? Will have major implications for the ways in which people work. If they are expected to change their processes, significant organisational redesign of structural systems may be needed. The implications of policies need to be considered carefully. As the text notes, the systems which will emerge from the policy must be practical, effective, secure and realistic.
The policy implementation needs similar consideration. Who will enact the policy? The CKO? Every manager? If so, are they happy with the proposed policy? Do they feel they can implement it?
The integration of this policy into other organisational systems and processes will need to be considered. Do other processes need to be changed? Will this impact on how people are measured as to their performance? How well can the system be integrated?
Similarly, the policy may need to address how highly confidential competitive knowledge will be handled. Who should have access? What safeguards might the organization consider? Should there be a review committee to monitor access issues? When should a confidential item be released more generally?
Conversely, should the CMS include information which is likely to last only a short time – even if it is highly strategic? One way around this issue is to clarify how basic, strategic and developmental knowledge should be treated.
K Viewpoint 7.2 provides an example of a knowledge policy for a university. Students may like to consider how well it addresses these issues. This is a very basic policy which focuses on principles. Students may like to discuss what else they believe should be noted. Keep listening for elements that move toward guidelines / process rather than principle.

20. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure
Systems and processes which assist with mapping and organising the organisation’s core knowledge
Encompasses mapping, categorising, indexing and otherwise labelling core knowledge to facilitate its management
Enables the ready retrieval of core knowledge through effective search processes
Figure 7.1 and text, page 171.
Following the definition of the core knowledge, and the clarification of how the knowledge will be managed, the core knowledge structures need to be developed. This is the stage where the organisation needs to consider how it will manage its core knowledge to enable its use by the staff within the organisation.
This phase therefore explores the design of systems and processes which assist with mapping and organising the organisation's core knowledge.
It encompasses mapping, categorising, indexing and otherwise labelling core knowledge to facilitate its management. This greatly reduces the time which would otherwise be lost whenever a person searches for an item.
It also builds the infrastructure needed to enable the ready retrieval of core knowledge through effective search processes.
This phase will be broadly covered in this session, and then more deeply explored in the next.

21. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure
User-driven core knowledge
versus
Systematic core knowledge definition
Page 182 – 183.
When an organisation develops its knowledge strategy, it will need to make a number of decisions. At this point, a very important decision must occur. The organisation must decide whether it will build a systematic CMS strategy, or a more user-driven process.
An ad-hoc strategy operates when the CMS relies on user-driven core knowledge. This open and flexible approach allows users to define the knowledge in the way they see fit. While this is easy and personalised, it can be harder for people to locate and retrieve the knowledge later, as common terminology and structures may be absent. In other words, the cost is loaded on the users.
Systematic core knowledge definition allows more rigorous definition and management of the sources entered into the CMS, so that the demands in locating and retrieving those sources is minimised. The cost is loaded toward the front-end preparation.
Organisations need to consider which option will be best for them. If the system is likely to be very large, and used by many different popple, it is best to build a more systematic approach. The cost of entering and managing the front-end of the system will reap benefits as users find a streamlined and efficient system when they seek to find as much representative knowledge as possible.
KM Viewpoint 7.3 (page 183) describes the various structural cues which have been identified to allow different government agencies to share resources. It can be seen that even a simple structural listing of this nature starts to facilitate retrieval at a later stage. This approach enables users to search for predictable keywords which describe the knowledge focus. Methods like this can encourage the use of the knowledge system by users. Ease is a major factor in building acceptance.

22. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure
Mapping core knowledge
Knowledge maps describe the core knowledge categories and focal areas
Define the structural breakdown of the different core knowledge areas
Two types of maps can be developed: relational knowledge maps or operational knowledge maps
LO8, page 184.
Knowledge maps guide users as to how core knowledge is structured in the organisation. It assists with clarifying which knowledge aspects are included in the CMS. They describe the core knowledge categories and focal areas where core knowledge is generated. They also assist the user with identifying which knowledge should be shared, or can be retrieved. The map becomes, in effect, the scaffold on which core knowledge sits.
Maps can describe many different types of organisational knowledge, such as technologies, research, business processes, products, customer relationship management, records, regional data or joint venture profiles.
Two types of maps are often created: relational knowledge maps or operational knowledge maps. These are illustrated in the next two slides.

23. Relational knowledge map
Figure 7.3, page 185.
Relational knowledge maps explore the way knowledge can be applied and developed in real contexts. They recognise that various activities may have relationships.
A relational map considers the type of knowledge which is generated within the knowledge domain. This figure shows how relational maps are developed: they identify the various activities which are undertaken based on the intellectual content which is generated. In this example, the knowledge domain comprises six areas: research and development, patents and licenses, marketing, client education, contributor profiles and products. The relational map identifies the various tools and activities which are generated through these domain areas. In some cases, there will be crossover between the domains. For example, in the figure on this slide, the facts sheets used for client education describe the products the company develops. Those sheets may be retrieved by requesting guidance relating to client education or products.

24. Operational knowledge map
Part 2, Figure 7.2, Page 185 and text page 184.
Operational knowledge maps describe knowledge in terms of the structures which operate. In this example, the various knowledge activities are grouped under the structural groups which perform those roles.
These two figures are both legitimate ways to depict knowledge in an organisation. They both have value in providing suitable categories to describe core knowledge. In many knowledge systems, both maps are used.

25. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure (cont'd)
Establishing and promoting the knowledge repository
Repositories link the different sources by integrating them into a single united system which can be searched in many different ways
Structured or unstructured repository management strategies?
LO9, Page 185 – 186.
Repositories link the different sources by integrating them into a single united system which can be searched in many different ways.
They may draw these sources from a range of other subsystems, but appear to be a seamless system to the user. An effective repository can require very careful planning to reach this standard. There are many decisions which will need to be made in terms of how much management of the system will be undertaken.
A major decision relates to how the repository will operate. Should it be tightly controlled and structured or with a high degree of flexibility? These two options are explored more fully on the next slides.

26. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure (cont'd)
Structured repository management
Integrate the use of common structures, formally constituted headings and content descriptors to describe the content
Keyword headings facilitate subsequent retrieval by providing predictable and reliable terms which are used by both contributors and knowledge seekers
Descriptors guide the user as to the defined content to be found under a keyword
Page 186.
Structured repository management strategies integrate the use of common structures, formally constituted headings and content descriptors. These ensure that everyone who uses the system builds a common language and understanding. The structures allow better consistency across various users, and maintain that consistency over time – despite possible changes in local usage.
Keyword headings facilitate subsequent retrieval by providing predictable and reliable terms which are used by both contributors and knowledge seekers. They often reflect the formal terminology which is used by experts, although they may also draw on commonly used terms. Systems of this nature often allow searching under those different terms, but categorise under the official term.
Descriptors guide the user as to the defined content to be found under a keyword. This can be very helpful – especially for new staff who are tyring to build an understanding of how the core knowledge operates.

27. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure (cont'd)
Unstructured knowledge repositories
Knowledge is not structured in terms of content, but is found using free-text searching
Usage is flexible, and sources can be accessed in many creative ways
Successful identification of sources relies on the use of common language and ideas
Page 186.
In unstructured knowledge repositories, knowledge sources are not categorised or labelled through an underlying system. Instead, they are retrieved by users through their personalised retrieval strategies – often using free-text searching.
These systems allow high flexibility and are low cost installations. They can also incorporate many different forms of content, including s, group discussions, request and other forms of regular interaction. However, they can also strain the absorptive capacity of the individual, who may miss key sources or find far more irrelevant items in the search. The successful identification of sources relies on both contributor and seeker using the same terms and concepts. In many cases, this is unlikely.

28. Phase 3: Developing the Core Knowledge Structure (cont'd)
Repository design principles
Ensure only core knowledge is included
Clarify the level of control over content
Browser design should match the user needs and capabilities
There should be easy access to the system and user guidance
Search agents may assist the user
Pages 187 – 188.
Knowledge repositories should operate from a number of principles to ensure they maintain high rigour and quality. They are the central mechanism for building effective content.
They should control the form and nature of the knowledge which is to be recorded. Only core knowledge should be included.
The level of control which operates will be determined by the organisation. In some, the control over who enters data may be quite rigid, while others may be more flexible. Aspects to be considered may include a concern for quality, relevance, reliability, suitability, contributory value to decision-making and the need for legal record-keeping.
Control may be regulated centrally, managed by authorised officers or self-managed by each employee. Front-end investment in preparation and quality control greatly reduces the load on the knowledge user when the content is later extracted.
A browser provides access to the knowledge sources and allows contribution of new sources. The design of the system will normally reflect the organisational users requirements.
The system should enable easy access to the information. A user should be able to enter the website, request guidance on expertise on a topic, and be provided with a listing of key sources.
The service may include the provision of regular updates using a search agent. This service enables the user to establish key search requirements which will be automatically updates by an automated service. When new items appear, the user is then notified.

29. Content Authorship
Knowledge in repositories will be reused, adapted and generally changed over time
Should people be recognised for their contributions?
The source documentation can recognise each individual’s contribution and the date of the contribution
Recognition and reward systems may also integrate this information
LO10, page 188.
Repositories contain core knowledge which has high value to the organisation. Knowledge workers will be active in generating this information, and may be keen to be recognised for their contributions. However, knowledge also becomes less recognisable as it is used and re-used by others.
Should people be recognised for their contributions?
If the organisation wishes to acknowledge contributions, the repository structure can include fields to record each contributor’s information. This is one way of recognising knowledge donors.
Recognition and reward systems may also draw on this information when they wish to review people’s organisational contributions.

30. Concluding Points
Content management is a critical factor in building an effective KMS
Core knowledge should be clearly defined and agreed before the KMS is implemented
Structured and well controlled systems provide better overall support to the user
Knowledge repositories rely on effective knowledge maps to guide their structure and management
This session has explored a number of important issues. It has emphasised the critical importance of content management, and the ways in which core knowledge can be defined. It has also reviewed the ways in which knowledge can be structured and categorised. Finally, the session outlined the ways in which knowledge maps operate, and the value of knowledge repositories as a single source of support for knowledge users.

31. Today’s focus questions:
What is core knowledge?
Why is it important to clarify the scope and nature of core knowledge?
What are some of the likely issues which may arise when building a content management system?
Three questions were posed at the start of the session. Students should be able to respond to these at this point.
What is core knowledge?
Knowledge that is strategically important to the organisation, and which would benefit from sharing with others.
Why is it important to clarify the scope and nature of core knowledge?
Most organisations contain enormous quantities of knowledge. The KMS should focus on the most critical knowledge, not pull in anything that is available. The definition of core knowledge scope and its nature assists in building a common understanding and limiting the expansiveness of what is supported through the KMS. This ensures the system is manageable and valuable.
What are some of the likely issues which may arise when building a content management system?
Various issues might be noted:
The degree to which the CMS is controlled and managed
Recognition of content authorship
The level of knowledge to be included in the system
The capacity of the KMS to meet the likely user demands
The capacity of workers to use the CMS capabilities
The definition of the core knowledge.
There are many issues which might be identified.