Lesley M. • Perhaps it is the executives themselves who are reluctant to do something about the results of a KM survey?

Hendri M. • Or ... there has been an experience that 'expectations' were not met creating dissatisfaction among employees?

Vijaya M. • There is also a trend to use such surveys as cathartic experience by employees- who tend to use it as passive exercise in creating a wishlist rather than engage or reflect own their own contribution to knowledge management.

Himanshu D. • There could be this fear that we implemented KM to show to the board/management and now we need to show them the moon promised, but there is no moon yet : )

Sharon V. • It is impossible to work in a KM environment without unflinching honesty and openness. A simple SWOT among people in areas dependant on knowledge feeds and processes can really expose the current status - not to raise expectations in turn, but to allow people to vent, to say what they want, what they see and hope for. Experienced facilitators - knowledge managers - can come away from workshops with a realistic idea of what needs to be done - the gaps are usually so obvious - it just needs that first push..........with people - they need to be involved all the way eg in starting a community.

Ray S. • I am surprised to find myself understanding why some execs might decline a survey on KM (or any subject) because it might set expectations. I even find myself approving of their caution. Forget KM for a minute. Undertaking a survey on any subject matter takes time. As a potential participant why should I invest some of my time? I need to know the purpose of the survey and the potential benefits. (I do indeed decline lots of telephone marketing surveys on the basis that they're time consuming, of no immediate benefit (to me), and carry little inducement.)
What is an organisation going to do with the information gained? Is the information going to be made public? What if information gained shows things in a bad light (bursts the bubble)? And isn't it just going to add to 'initiative overload'? What more will be expected of me as a result?
I think people in general have learned to be somewhat sceptical of 'surveys'. Some genuine reluctance on the part of execs may not be a bad thing. What's key is what's going to be done and be done in competition with lots of other things that need to be done. Why give this matter priority commercially? needs to be answered.
I guess we're all burdened by lots and lots of information requests and I guess we may sometimes feel that we provide lots of information to very little effect.
What leverage accrues to this sort of survey more than any other?
I guess we need to sell the benefits of any 'survey'.

Lesley M. • Ray raises some good points. Sometimes I think that people are too quick to leap on the survey bandwagon as a means of addressing a perceived issue. My beef with surveys is not so much the "time consuming" issue, but more to do with the suitability of this method of research. There are plenty of examples of survey findings being shown to be completely at odds with the reality. People are asked questions that they are not normally asked in their everyday jobs, frequently using language which is not natural, or offering forced choice answer options. Whilst surveys can be useful and provide valid findings in some cases, it really comes down to the research question - is this an appropriate method for addressing the question at hand?

Martin F. • I’m currently planning a KM staff survey that will provide input to our annual revision of the KM strategy. And repeating the same survey in future years will allow us to monitor progress and change.

The strategy must reflect the current situation and culture. It’s a bit presumptuous of me to assume I know what everyone else feels without any supporting evidence, even in a relatively small organisation. The survey is one source of information which helps determine our strategy, and can be used to justify some of our strategic goals and proposed activities. When senior management ask me why we need a wiki, I can say that staff have said it would be beneficial - so it’s not just me as your KM expert saying we should have one because I think they are a good thing. I’m sure my execs take my proposals more seriously when I can demonstrate I understand the business and culture of the organisation.

I’d have thought that most organisations that carry out KM surveys were already doing KM and employing KM staff. I’d be concerned about the future of KM within an organisation where the senior execs were frightened of the consequences of a survey.

So for me, a survey is an appropriate method, but you shouldn't rely on it as your only source of information. And of course, you have to avoid producing a survey that just tells you what you already know: a recent survey showed that six out of seven dwarves weren’t happy :)

Matthew L. • Lesley, having seen some of the poorly-crafted and largely meaningless surveys put out (usually by HR) that didn't arise from a research process and were deployed abysmally and interpreted erroneously, I fully agree with you on the suitability issue. Survey's are only one method amongst many.

I am not sure that this explains the exec fear of "setting expectations" though. My current view is that if one is afraid that asking would set expectations, it already says volumes about what is likely to be wrong - and also indicates that management have already abandoned their duty to pay attention and be inquisitive.
It feels to me like hoping that things will go away if you just ignore them.

Lesley M. • For an interesting take - and indeed warning - on the use of wikis in the workplace, see Garcia-Perez, A. and Ayres, R. (2010). Wikifailure: the limitations of technology for knowledge sharing. Electronic journal of knowledge management, 8, (1), pp 43 - 52. This study - which I would argue does use some dubious research methods - reports on the use of a wiki to encourage knowledge sharing. Despite the employees being heavily involved in its design and so forth, and their protestations of willingness, the thing was a failure. Interestingly, the highest use of the Wiki was for social activity. Doesn't that say something?

Good point Martin - you can interpret the findings of surveys to mean almost anything!

Lesley M. • Hello Matthew - our postings crossed!

"My current view is that if one is afraid that asking would set expectations, it already says volumes about what is likely to be wrong" - I call that a "nail on the head". This organisation doesn't require a KM strategy, it requires a new CEO!

Matthew L. • Lesley, my work thus far leads me to believe that poor management is often the culprit.

Thanks for the statement though, because I was about to launch into a tirade about my previous research results showing the influence that staff perceptions of management attitude played on adoption of eLearning by staff - and then I realized that my survey didn't measure peer pressure!

So I am busy amending version 2.2 of my KMOL-C survey instrument, and very grateful to you for the prod. :)

John T. • Obviously surveys have flaws...but they are an easy way to get feedback. Only problem is that you get so many answers that you would have to boil the ocean to tackle them all. Reason being is KM is about every aspect of doing work.

How about trying a minimal approach using anecdote circles....I haven't tried this but it looks good
http://www.anecdote.com.au/file.php?fn=Ultimate_Guide_to_ACs_v1.0.pdf

If you have success with facilitating a team to fix bottlenecks, motivations, resources, information flow and other processes...this can be used as a showcase and as a magnet for other teams to want to do the same.

The ideal outcome is that various groups want you to facilitate fixing their "flow"...and after a while bit by bit KM is happening.

This is a bit by bit approach that self-promotes itself, rather than a broad approach.

Sometimes I think doing things with small groups is better as you can focus on using your expertise an listening to unique issues. When you do big groups you can't be relevant to everyone and you end up being too busy administering your initiative rather than applying your skills...you want to be the speaker, not the event organiser.

Matthew L. • John, I like the idea and have been toying with using the "tell me a story" approach for a while.
I remember this being part of the "forums" craze back in the 80's, but it was never developed into anything really useful.

Thanks for bringing it up.

jon T. • Instead of having a right ... or wrong conversation ... about why senor managers are wrong to not do a survey ... why not focus on an alternative. Give them a choice between 2 things?

Angela L. • With any survey with an implication of subsequent action, you need to focus on what you want to get out of it - and make that clear to those being surveyed. For example, asking staf, "are you stressed", is pointless without some indication of what the causative factors or affordable solutions might be. I would always argue that the potential issues and solutions should be explored while the survey is being designed. There may be surprises, but at least most of what comes out will be anticipated - and potential solutions budgeted for.

Bob W. • This has been an interesting thread to follow. As new member, I am just feeling my way into the community, and I am glad I joined. Maybe the people who have responded know the person who started the discussion, but I have not seen anything which syas who wants to do the survey. If it is a consultant treying to sell his/her wares, then execs may be reasoblay concerned, but if the request for a survey comes form inside the organization, it may be easier to justify. I do agree with all those who made the point that both particiipants and managers need to know wand what will follow from it.

Kelli S. • This is an interesting discussion with lots of good input. Someone may have mentioned this already but one thing that needs to be established that might alter the exec's hesitation is what exactly will be gained from the survey results. Probably the more specific the better.

One thing we've done on the subject of KM that is not mentioned here are organization network analysis surveys. We've done them related to other subjects as well (such as now well our IT org is communicating and collaborating). It also serves as a good benchmark for future measurement and comparison.

Matthew L. • Hi Kelli, Social Network Analysis is something I separate from the climate survey since there are a lot of potentially evil side-effects of SNA that need to be covered in some depth before management can sign off in good faith but that would be informed to a degree by the KMOL-C survey.

I see the climate survey as a precursor to many activities, including that of SNA, but explaining in detail what the survey will achieve is not really possible beyond simply saying "it will inform us".
To a degree, if execs won't even take the risk of a survey, then it pretty much tells you that the situation is as close to rock-bottom as could be.

Maybe a pre-survey survey should include a question about willingness to take the risk to find out what is going on ;)

Tola B. • I agree that this has been an interesting thread to follow.. something that was said sparked my interest: what are some potentially evil side-effects of SNA? I'm at the beginning stages of starting one at my company.