Knowledge Management in the Public Sector

A Blueprint for Innovation in Government

David E McNabb

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9780765617286
• eBook ISBN: 9781317466697
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

This comprehensive text introduces public management students and government and nonprofit administrators to the principles and practices of Knowledge Management. The first book to focus exclusively on knowledge management techniques in government agencies, it covers such important concepts as collecting, categorizing, processing, distributing, and archiving critical organization data and information - and then converting and disseminating these resources to all who need to share in the organizational knowledge. Written in an easy-to-read, non-technical style, the book includes a thorough review of the current literature in the field as well as a comprehensive presentation of Knowledge Management techniques. Extensive illustrations, models, checklists, and instructions lead readers through the steps involved in instituting KM programs in government and non-profit agencies.

Part 1

Foundations of Knowledge Management

---

---

1

Historical Foundations of KM

---

---

When the [US] Department of Defense invented the Internet in the 1960s as a communications network for defense research purposes, no one could have foreseen how it would transform society three decades later. Today, the Internet has become a part of the daily life of [citizens around the globe].

(Ho 2002, 434)

Information technology (IT) has become one of the core elements of managerial reform, and electronic government (e-government) may figure prominently in future governance. IT has opened many possibilities for improving internal managerial efficiency and the quality of public service delivery to citizens.

(Moon 2002, 424)

This book is about the use of knowledge management (KM) systems and processes by government organizations to improve the ways they operate and the ways that they deliver public services to citizens. Improving organizational performance includes making it possible for agencies to become more innovative in carrying out their missions, while at the same time becoming more accountable to the publics they serve. The organizational drive is to harness the existing knowledge in government agencies to foster creative problem solving by government workers at all levels. Knowledge management is a key component in this new way of functioning.

Chapter Objectives

This chapter has been framed on a set of objectives that are designed to help readers:

• Gain an introduction to the field of knowledge management and its evolution into an accepted principle for public-sector administration and management.

• Understand how KM is an essential component in the transforming government and e-government movements.

• Understand that, although significant differences exist between the private and public sectors, many management concepts and processes—such as knowledge management—are equally applicable in both sectors.

• Recognize that KM is only the latest in a long tradition of management methods and programs that have been designed to enable the leveraging of organizational knowledge and experience.

• Understand how KM helps government organizations make the highly desirable shift from reactive agencies to learning organizations.

• Understand that KM enables greater innovation and creativity in government organizations.

Business managers and managers of public agencies are often told that management in the two sectors is inherently different. It is not the purpose of this book to seek to say whether that statement is true or not. However, it does deal with the question: Is the way KM is acquired and implemented in government really any different than it is in business and industry? Depending upon with whom you’re conversing, you would still hear yes, no, or maybe. This book proceeds on the premise that those who support the difference argument are probably right.

Writing on the use of executive information systems in government, one group of observers had this to say about differences between the private and public sectors:

Differences between private and government organizations are at the core of public administration theory and have been the topic of an ongoing stream of research…. Differences have been found, for example, in personnel management, decision making and information systems. (Watson and Carte 2000, 373)

Watson and Carte also identified these bases for the differences: environmental factors, the ways in which sector organizations interact with their environments and with their stakeholders, and fundamental differences in organizational structures and processes. Also, because public organizations have less interaction with the market, they are not as influenced by rewards and punishments associated with market controls. Finally, public sector organizations:

• Are more constrained in their choices of procedures,

• Perform activities that are mandated by political forces,

• Face more external formal controls and specifications on their actions,

• Deal with greater external influence on what they do and how they do it,

• Gain approval from a wide variety of stakeholders,

• Have multiple, often contradictory, objectives,

• Have less autonomy and control over decision making and human resources,

• Are less able to devise incentives for staff performance,

• And are often forced to have their failures—large and small—aired in the public press.

The editorial director of the industry journal KMWorld prefaced a special supplement on best practices in government in the June 2005 issue of the magazine, in which he stated flatly, “The point being: government is different.” However, then speaking for KM consultants and IT vendors, he added, “But as ‘different’ as government can be, it can also be very familiar” (Moore 2005, S2).

Three of what may be the greatest differences are (1) the government’s move toward enterprise architectures—the mandate for all agencies to identify commonalities of use in IT so that cost savings can be gained through bulk purchases; (2) government’s long history of learning how to work with regulatory issues in the use of KM and IT; and (3) the driving force of public policy that forces government agencies to respond to legislative and executive mandates.

An IT industry spokesperson was quoted in the same special supplement preface of KMWorld, speaking on the regulatory experience of government: “Government is in on the forefront of regulatory compliance because they have had compliance mandates for decades.” In industry, corporate standards on the use of IT are still fairly new; many businesses are just beginning to understand the sensitivity and discoverability of electronic records—as the officers, managers, and directors of Enron and Anderson Consulting learned to their dismay.

Government purchases of KM systems and support are also driven by public policy—a point that the private sector does not have to deal with. Moore quoted another industry spokesperson, Gary Ward, vice president of sales for X1 Technologies: “You can have the most amazing technology in the world, but if there is not a policy imperative driving the adoption, it [selling to the government] is going to be difficult sledding in the public sector.” Summarizing his views on the differences, Moore concluded, “In government the driving impetus is from public policy and budget pressure. In the private sector, the driving impetus is business performance and … budget pressure.”

Evolution of KM in the Public Sector

Many observers feel that KM is really nothing new. Rather, it should be considered the latest component in the government’s fifty-plus-year effort to integrate information technology (IT) into operations to improve performance and make government agencies and departments more accountable. By 2005, the latest development in this progression had become a global movement to reform the way governments serve their citizens; around the world that movement is referred to as e-government. One leading enterprise software and knowledge systems industry spokesperson described the foundation for this movement in these terms:

Governmental organizations worldwide are facing several challenges as administrative, executive and judicial bodies continue to evolve into an electronic work environment. Pushed by paperwork-reduction mandates, requirements to handle increase workloads with fewer personnel and the rapid adoption of electronic communication channels by taxpayers and citizens, governments are often on the forefront of adopting new approaches to electronic information management. (McKinnon 2005)

Tacit knowledge is knowledge held in the minds of the men and women who hold, use, and share what they know about things and how to do what they do. Explicit knowledge is knowledge that has been or can be written down and contained in documents and other media.

Three converging trends are behind the drive by public-sector organizations to gain better control of their information infrastructure and management of the tacit and explicit knowledge held by their personnel and in knowledge repositories in the organization. The first trend is the expected high turnover in knowledge workers as large numbers of the baby-boom generation retire; a number of studies have cited the coming loss of senior project and technical managers as the greatest risk facing the public sector at the start of the new century.

The second trend is a global acceleration of the push to implement e-government; agencies at all levels have been increasing the amount and variety of online services available to citizens. Many government agencies are also providing mobile communications capability for their knowledge workers, thus enabling them to communicate as information is gathered. Such electronic tools as personal handheld devices, smart phones, tablets, and laptop computers have freed knowledge workers from the tyranny of being chained to a desk.

The third trend is continued emphasis on Enterprise Architecture Initiatives (i.e., shared services) to achieve greater operational efficiencies and implement Web-based service delivery. Agencies must comply with enterprise architecture analyses mandated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) before they can replace or acquire new information technology. McKinnon described this mandate as “the constant battle to develop operational efficiencies in the face of budget and program cutbacks.” It means that all government agencies must include IT acquisitions in their strategic plans. They must also establish common network platforms for e-mail, and all information and knowledge management systems.

What KM Does

KM is about managing information to make the most of the knowledge in an organization in order to benefit from finding and applying innovative answers to old and new questions. Information and communications technology constitutes one of the three chief building blocks of knowledge management. The other two are the people who use knowledge and the processes that have been developed to enable and enhance knowledge capture and sharing (Joch 2004).

Technology has made it possible for KM to evolve into what it has become today—a key management tool that is necessary for agencies and institutions to function and flourish in today’s knowledge economy. Few would argue with Peter Drucker’ s 1995 conclusion that the world has entered upon a postindustrial economy characterized by globalization, increasingly sophisticated information and communications technology, and a knowledge society. Nonaka (1991) added that in this new economy the only certainty is that knowledge is the only sustainable source of competitive advantage (Butler et al. 2003).

This chapter presents a brief review of how early knowledge management concepts evolved over the first decade or so of KM’s existence, to the point where by the middle of the first decade of the twenty-first century, KM had become a normal way of operating in many federal, state, and local governments. Administrators and managers agree that KM’s blend of technology, people, and processes holds a key to organizational improvement, if not even for survival, in the face of an environment characterized by heightened political polarity, severely limited resources, and demands for government agencies at all levels to do more with less.

What KM Does Not Do

Amrit Tiwana included a list of things that KM does not do for organizations in the second edition of his Knowledge Management Toolkit. These points were offered as a way for KM system designers and government purchasing agents to “cleanse” themselves of intense vendor pitches:

• KM is not knowledge engineering. Rather, KM falls into the domains of management and information systems, not computer science.

• KM is not only about digital networks; it is about management processes. Technology is an enabler, not a driver.

• KM is not about building a smarter internal communications network (intranet). Nor are they the same. KM is about knowledge and experience.

• KM is not about a one-time investment in technology. It is a future-oriented investment that requires consistent attention and evaluation.

• KM is not about “enterprise-wide in...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Tables, Figures, and Boxes
• Introduction
• Part 1. Foundations of Knowledge Management
• Part 2. Transforming Government with KM
• Part 3. KM Systems in the Public Sector
• Part 4. Stories of Public-Sector KM in Action
• Glossary
• Bibliography
• About the Author
• About the Invited Contributors
• Index