Re: Knowledge Management

[Ginna Dowler <gdowler -at- QUESTERCORP -dot- COM>]

Metzger Karen wrote:
> Knowledge pools (my term) is the first. In my world it's trendy to talk
> about "Knowledge Management," the idea of making available for the common
> good--in an intelligent way that makes retrieval simple--documentation
> written for specific projects that could be used more widely. People who
> want to collaborate on documentation sometimes use products that enable
them
> to store their working documents in a public place for collaborative
> purposes using a check-in/check-out process to enforce version control
> (using, for example, Livelink, Keyfile, or PCMS). Now I've learned of a
site
> on the Web that provides this service to the general public
> (http://www.mydocsonline.com).

You've got a couple of different issues here. Making released or source
documentation available and easy to retrieve is a completely different
practice than version control (part of configuration management). CM is
a *discipline* (my word) which is often aided by software tools (Source
Safe, PCMS etc.)

> Part II of my question involves the ISO and the lesser-known (as far as I
> can tell) SEI certification drive. I wonder whether these standards
include
> guidelines or specifications on how documents are stored for public use or
> collaboration during production.

ISO 9000 (or 1, or 2) is a quality standard and contains no specific
instructions on how documentation should be stored for public use or
controlled. In order to acheive *registration*, you need to demonstrate
document and data control, but there is no requirement to follow a set
procedure, or use a set tool. Just to state what you do and prove that
you've done it.

By "SEI Certification" I assume you mean the Capability Maturity Model,
and the levels therein. The CMM key practice areas include all kinds of
configuration management requirements, but no *standard* to follow.
Mostly again it all comes back to having some sort of stated procedure
that everyone can follow and receive training in etc. Again, you can use
various software tools, but there's no requirement. Making documents
publicly available can range from a large filing cabinet that everyone
knows about to a sophisticated intranet.

> I am working on a service that may help in these areas and was just trying
> to get a feel for the market.

If by service you mean templates or standards, then I'm not sure that
they would be of much help. Defining the process, and how it works best
for *your* company is more than half the battle.

>How badly do companies want to solve these problems, or do they care? Are
they >aware of the financial losses they incur from lack of organization in
these areas, >for example?

What financial losses? ISO registration is very expensive to acheive.
There has to be a pretty compelling need to begin the process. ISO
registration is not about saving money, it's about proving to your
clients that your products will be consistent, and that an outside body
says that you have met a set level of documentation and accountability.
CMM indicates that at Level 2 your software engineering processes are
repeatable across projects, not that the process will therefore save
money. (I know this one well 'cause we had our evaluation this week. The
other levels I haven't looked closely at!)

If you mean that they are *losing potential clients* because they
haven't achieved ISO registration or CMM Level 2, then that's very
different (and hard to prove).

If you could define what type of service you are trying to market, maybe
we could be of more help.

--
Ginna Dowler - Technical Writer
Quester Tangent Corporation
Sidney, BC
gdowler -at- questercorp -dot- com

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=