KAI

From Secure Group Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Knowledge Accountability Index an instrument used to view everyone’s ability and competency for a specific occupation. The index captures a wide range of abilities and organizes them into five Grades; from “Fundamental Awareness” to “Expert”. An individual can compare their current grade of proficiency to top performers in the same occupation.

Company Knowledge Centricity Level

Our current situation is represented by Grade 1 and Grade 2 depending on of individual and department.

Goal
Our strategic goal is to achieve Grade 3 till spring and Grade 5 by next year

Secure Group Centricity Grade
Knowledge Centricity Grade Grade Description Capabilities Value Delivered Knowledge Footprint
Grade 1 Inability to generate actionable knowledge
  • Required skills not existant internally.
  • Lack of organizational will.
  • Focus only on basic transactional functionality.
Understanding on an ad hoc, post-mortem basis as to why it happened. Little Knowledge infrastructure.
Grade 2 Knowledge silos within the organization.
  • Business unit / function-centric knowledge creation.
  • Lack of vision to action / compete on knowledge.
  • Little or no information sharing across business units/functions.
Understanding of business and issues which must be addressed to improve individual business units/functions. Analytical resources embedded in local functional teams.
Grade 3 Aspire to leverage knowledge.
  • Desire to leverage knowledge driven from the top.
  • Efforts underway to integrate / better understand internal knowledge capabilities.
Ability to capture current conditions, attempt to understand future trends model in place. Local knowledge delivery Model in place.
Grade 4 Knowledge-Driven Business
  • Centralized effort to understand business trends holistically.
  • Knowledge creation, capture, and management key driver for people performance.
Ability to anticipate I adapt to changes in external/internal environments to obtain/retain competitive advantage analytical structure. Central enterprise-wide knowledge structure.
Grade 5 Industry Knowledge Leader
  • Knowledge-driven innovation driving business growth.
  • Employees are passionate and committed to analytics.
Generate consistent business value through insights to obtain competitive advantage established analytical processes embedded in over competition organization. Well established knowledge process embedded in the organization.

Why is it failing

1. Inefficient when it serves only individuals. When an employee or a prospect gains information from another person – say, via email or through a conversation, this knowledge has been transferred to a grand total of one person. It takes time and diligence to convey knowledge – and to go through that effort for one person alone is completely inefficient. There are likely dozens, if not hundreds or thousands of other stakeholders who might be in need of the exact same information. That’s a lot of emails or phone calls.

2. Reckless with employees’ time because it’s repetitious. In most cases, stakeholders will get answers and information in a one-on-one conversation. (For instance, an employee asks a colleague a question or a prospect visits the location to talk with a staff member.) This knowledge transfer process is hardly even a process; it’s disruptive and time-consuming. When a handful of Subject Matter Experts are heavily relied upon to provide information verbally, they’re interrupted frequently to answer the same questions over and over by different people – they spend their time repeating the same information when they could be doing more value-added work.

3. Ineffectual because it’s impermanent. According to the latest research, it’s extremely difficult for humans to remember information they learned even just a few days ago. This problem – illustrated in the Curve of Forgetting – is exacerbated if the person learned this information verbally. That’s just a reality of the human brain. So not only was the process to acquire the information time-consuming and wasteful, it wasn’t even effective. The person probably has forgotten some or most of the knowledge and will be forced to seek it out again.

4. Uncontrolled because no one is accountable. A non-existent or ill-thought-out knowledge transfer process means that no one can be held accountable to be sure the information they have is accurate and up-to-date. When managers and company leadership don’t know:

  • What they need their team to know
  • What their team already know and if it is correct
  • What their team do not know
  • If the accurate information is readily available to all relevant members of the team

No one can hold employees accountable to own the correct knowledge and to leverage it appropriately. This means staff can be wasting time looking for answers, providing incorrect, incomplete, or outdated information to prospects and customers, not following the wrong processes and guidelines – and there’s no proper way to assess their work, correct them, or monitor their improvement afterward.

5. A self-fulfilling prophecy that's bound to reoccur. Though stakeholders may be willing to go to some effort to find and learn the knowledge they need, when the process stops after they’ve got the information they want, the organization misses out on a key opportunity to streamline their process, reduce repetition, and better serve others. Aside from the knowledge giver and recipient, no one else is aware of the gap that existed in the first place – thus, no one can prevent this situation from reoccurring.

Where knowledge should not be

1. In previously published content: For example, Ivan might dust off his old training manual or search on the company intranet to look for the answer. The problem? This is time-consuming – especially since the information may not even be there, or could be outdated. Worse, the information might actually be present in other materials of which Ivan isn’t aware or to which he does not have access.
2. In somebody’s brain: Ivan fastest option is to ask one of his colleagues. He might email, call, or have a conversation with a co-worker. But if the particular expert he needs is out sick, too busy to talk, or simply makes a mistake, Ivan either has an incorrect answer or no answer at all. In addition, he has also disrupted that employee from his or her tasks.
3. In the cloud: Sometimes, the knowledge exists in a sub-space that isn’t formally published content, but has been recorded. For instance, Ivan might find the answer sifting through his archived emails, memos, company updates, or notes. Chances are its obscure, ill-explained, and hard to find.

Knowledge Level Description

This scale serves as the guide to understanding the expected proficiency in each grade.

Grade Name Description Focus
1 Not Applicable. You are not required to apply or demonstrate this competency. This competency does not apply to your position.
2 Fundamental Awareness (basic knowledge). You have a common knowledge or an understanding of basic techniques and concepts. Focus on learning.
3 Novice (limited experience)
  • You have the level of experience gained in a classroom and/or experimental scenarios or as a trainee on-the-job. You are expected to need help when performing this skill.
  • You understand and can discuss terminology, concepts, principles, and issues related to this competency;
  • You utilize the full range of reference and resource materials in this competency.
Focus on developing through on-the-job experience.
4 Intermediate (practical application)
  • You are able to successfully complete tasks in this competency as requested. Help from an expert may be required from time to time, but you can usually perform the skill independently.
  • You have applied this competency to situations occasionally while needing minimal guidance to perform successfully;
  • You understand and can discuss the application and implications of changes to processes, policies, and procedures in this area.
Focus is on applying and enhancing knowledge or skill.
5 Advanced (applied theory)
  • You can perform the actions associated with this skill without assistance. You are certainly recognized within your immediate organization as "a person to ask" when difficult questions arise regarding this skill.
  • You have consistently provided practical/relevant ideas and perspectives on the process or practice improvements which may easily be implemented;
  • You are capable of coaching others in the application of this competency by translating complex nuances relating to this competency into easy to understand terms;
  • You participate in senior level discussions regarding this competency;
  • You assist in the development of reference and resource materials in this competency.
Focus is on broad organizational/professional issues.
6 Expert (recognized authority)
  • You are known as an expert in this area. You can provide guidance, troubleshoot and answer questions related to this area of expertise and the field where the skill is used.
  • You have demonstrated consistent excellence in applying this competency across multiple projects and/or organizations;
  • You are considered the “go to” person in this area within Secure Group and/or outside organizations;
  • You create new applications for and/or lead the development of reference and resource materials for this competency;
  • You are able to diagram or explain the relevant process elements and issues concerning organizational issues and trends in sufficient detail during discussions and presentations, to foster a greater understanding among internal and external colleagues and constituents.
Focus is strategic.

Secure Group Knowledge Accountability Index

To be edited once the Skills are defined

References

All Roads
The Talent Development Platform