Watch where you step, info pros

I recently penned an article for Information Outlook about social libraries, and the steps to take (and not to take) to get there. It appeared in the magazine's December 08 issue, but in case you missed it, Information Outlook was generous to allow us to post a PDF of the article here on the blog. Thank you!

In the piece, titled "Social Libraries: The Next Generation of Knowledge Management," I flesh out many of the points I made throughout our Road to Social Knowledge Networks series, and apply them to a special library environment.

Point your mouse to the article to read about the “five missteps to a social library,” the librarian’s new and more important role in social library management, and some other trend analysis in this space.

Social knowledge network nutshell

We might have reached the end of the Road to Social Knowledge Networks, but there remains much to consider. Let's review the biggest take-aways from our adventure.

Social knowledge networks are not a junk drawer of data, strewn across a shared network drive. They are not simple search engines, siloed information centers, or purely social environments.

While social knowledge networks draw upon these technologies, the key to creating a true SKN is remembering knowledge is more than vetted research, books, or image repositories. And it's more than social communications and networking. It's the combination of the two.

A social knowledge network provides a one-stop shop for information. It's a secure place where content and social media can be controlled using a social volume knob. The community can enhance and inform the content, creating social intelligence.

When we work with clients all around the world, we are trying to help them increase the value and use of their information assets.

This means helping them move from a state where information is disorganized and privately held, to a state where information is organized, accessible, enhanced, and informed by the community. That's where we gain productivity, wisdom, and truth.

Pump up the jam

Just when you thought we couldn't possibly use the word "social" any more frequently on the blog, we're kicking it up a notch. And to do so, we're using *drum roll!* the "social volume knob."



But before I completely drown myself out, let me explain what a social volume knob is, and why it's important. It's the next step in our Road to Social Knowledge Networks, and the little caveat I mentioned in my last installment.

Social knowledge networks allow vetted information -- such as documents, images, videos, presentations, RSS feeds, and so on -- to be enhanced and informed by comments, ratings, and other feedback from the community. This combination of top down and bottom up information is how we create social intelligence.

But social intelligence must be cultivated, planned, and nurtured. This is where a social volume knob becomes crucial. A social volume knob is the strategy organizations use to control who provides what knowledge to the SKN, and how they do so.

Organizations can set these parameters using rich security, access, and permission functionality. So, depending on the company, the community that is allowed to provide feedback can run the gamut from a small, hand-picked group of domain experts, to a broader set of individuals.

Each contributor's access capabilities can be adjusted, so perhaps one person can blog, rate, and comment, while another can just comment -- and only on certain content. This lets vetted information retain its veracity, and provides control over what content gets socialized, and how.

Otherwise, you have a free-for-all of opinions without authority. Consider Wikipedia. Any regular reader to our blog is all too familiar with my opinions on Wikipedia. While hugely successful and helpful for certain situations, its information sorely lacks veracity.

The same can be true in an enterprise environment, where you end up with what I call "social spam." It's similar to e-mail spam, but in a social media setting. This is the bad information provided by non-experts. Using social tools requires some level of control and mediation. You need rules.

That's also why info professionals must be at the center of the SKN and social library equation. They are knowledge management professionals trained to organize information. They understand the user community, and who is best equipped to create and act on content.

Info professionals create the environment necessary to publish content, and develop knowledge communities around that content. This includes implementing a knowledge strategy to ensure contributors are helping to build, maintain, and manage the social library in a logical, organized fashion.

Key take-away: All social knowledge networks need a social volume knob for quality control.

And with that kernel of knowledge, we've reached the end of the Road to Social Knowledge Networks! But no journey is complete without a look back on the lessons learned, and a look ahead to where we go from here. That will be the subject of next week's post.

Get smart

No, I'm not talking about Steve Carell's latest movie with Anne Hathaway or the more vintage TV version with Don Adams and Barbara Feldon. I'm talking about what happens when book smarts and street smarts align, and social knowledge networks collide. Welcome to the next step in our Road to Social Knowledge Networks.

Last week I told you what SKNs are. Today, I'm exploring why you should care, and what happens when organizations use them.

With social knowledge networks, the goal is to reach a state where core knowledge is collected, organized, accessible; and then where it can be enhanced, embraced, and informed by the wisdom of the community. So what can you gain from it?

Productivity. SKNs are not about the technology. They're about you and your organization becoming more efficient by accessing reliable information you can use to make better business decisions and achieve organizational objectives.

Wisdom. SKNs connect people by the problem they are solving, and break down department boundaries. Information takes many forms, with an SKN heterogeneous data is easily accessed and shared. And the wisdom of the community is tightly connected to the content and is crucial to the creation of value.

Truth. In SKNs, socialization is content-centric. There is no "separate but equal." Rather, there is a tight integration between content and social commentary to make the information more relevant, easier to find, and of higher value.

SKNs create an environment where internal documents, subscription research, and other vetted information makes users book smart,



and where the advice of colleagues makes users street smart.



Problems that could not previously be solved and insights that could not previously be gained, are discovered. We call this new level of intelligence "social intelligence."

Key take-away: Social knowledge networks are about finding the truth and enabling social intelligence.

If you're wondering what the fine print to all this might be, your curiosity will soon be satisfied. I'll explain the caveat next week.

What is a social knowledge network, anyway??

We've been talking about social knowledge networks a lot, and have described them in various ways on the blog. But today, you're in for a full serving of social knowledge networks with all the fixins'. It's the next and final stage along the Road to Social Knowledge Networks, and I'll detail exactly what the heck they are.

Now that we're at the final step of our journey, I like to say we've reached nirvana. The ideal destination for today's info pro. (But this is not to say there's no room for improvement and innovation. We believe SKNs are the nirvana of today, and there inevitably will be new nirvanas in the future as technology and needs evolve.)

In a nutshell, we define SKNs as a tight integration of a knowledge repository and social media. It is a place where socialization is "content centric." Core knowledge, also known as top-down or vetted information, is collected, organized and made accessible. This might include internal documents, news and research.

This knowledge can then be embraced and enhanced by the community, aptly dubbed "wisdom of the community," or bottom-up information. This consists of people's knowledge, opinions, and feedback about vetted information. In the SKN, the top down and bottom up information remain tightly integrated in the core repository using context-based social tools, including comments, ratings, tagging and tag clouds, and blogging.



What we have, then, is a centralized knowledgebase that keeps getting smarter, as info pros and users alike improve the content using social tools. This lets organizations achieve what we call "social intelligence." It is the state where problems are solved and insights are gained through a knowledge repository, collaboration, and context-based social tools.

This is, of course, the goal. A social knowledge network is a one-stop shop for information. It's a secure place where content and social media can be controlled, and the community can enhance and inform the content.

Key take-away: Knowledge is more than vetted research, books, or image repositories. And it's more than social communications and networking. It's the combination of the two: social knowledge networks.

So what, you say? Well, just as the central knowledgebase keeps getting smarter, so does the organization, and in more ways than one. More on the business benefits of SKNs next week.

Kumbaya, my friends, Kumbaya

You've probably sung, chanted, hummed, or otherwise butchered this song at least once in your life. But, my fellow crooners, did you know the meaning of your words? Gather round the campfire, folks. It's time to find out, because Kumbaya is the topic of today's Road to Social Knowledge Networks chapter.

The meaning of Kumbaya is disputed. But it's often loosely translated from African dialect as "come by here." The folk song is largely associated with unity and closeness, but is has more recently come to connote a naively optimistic view on life.



Let's apply this to knowledge management. In the state of Kumbaya, organizations have embraced social media technologies. They might be blogging, tweeting, Facebooking, Flickring, YouTubing, Deliciousing, and ing-ing with every other social media tool out there. They think they're taking the right approach to foster knowledge sharing, but are unaware they've, in fact, thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

These organizations have abandoned traditional methods of organizing information, and moved to a purely social media environment. Their thinking is that this model will solve their information management and collaboration problems, which I've touched upon in previous chapters.

To them I say, Whoa, Nelly. Don't get carried away. The results of taking a purely social approach to knowledge management can be disastrous, for a few reasons.

First, due to what I like to call the Wikipedia phenomenon. Wikipedia is 100 percent user-generated information. Some users are experts in their subject matter, and provide accurate and reliable information. Others are amateurs, polluting the repository with inaccurate data and bad links.

That's why Wikipedia's validity can, and often is, questioned. The information has low veracity. But just a moment, you say. Third party research (such as this study by the journal Nature) shows Wikipedia to be about as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica.

My response is simple. At a recent conference presentation, I asked the audience, "How many of you used Wikipedia?" Everybody raised their hand.

When I asked, "How many of you have brought a Wikipedia article into a business meeting and used it as critical data on which to make a business decision?" No one raised their hand. Sorry Wikipedia fans. Veracity matters.

This leads to another consequence of purely social KM models. I refer to it as "social spam." Just like e-mail spam, social spam is information you don't want. This is the bad information provided by non-experts. These non-experts can end up contradicting the experts and telling them they are wrong.

What's an uninformed knowledge seeker to do? Who do they listen to? Who do they trust? Consider this. A blog gives its authors a megaphone to voice their knowledge and opinions. But opening the blog to the entire organizational community gives every worker a megaphone. You're left with a situation that looks like this:



When building a high-quality knowledge repository, organizations must control who contributes information, and how. Using social tools in an organization requires mediation and management, which is the role of the librarian. Everyone can't have a megaphone.

This is the opposite of what you need, want, or get from using a consumer SM site, or by moving to a purely social KM environment. In this case, Kumbaya isn't so comforting.

Key take-away: Purely social KM models weaken veracity and create chaos. In an enterprise knowledge repository, access to high-quality assets is key, and avoiding chaos is crucial.

Next week, I'll tell you how to achieve this.

The information silo break-down

If you've ever been around a farm, this is probably a familiar sight.



It's also the subject of today's Road to Social Knowledge Networks chapter. I like to call it the "silo mentality."

At this content management stage, companies have well-organized information repositories. But each repository is created by individual departments, and thus organized in very different ways.

They use various methods to name, save, sort and categorize documents. These methods vary so much that a worker from one department cannot navigate another department's system to find anything.

And more importantly, because they are organized by department, the silos do not address the common and pressing cross-organizational problems that workers need to solve on a daily basis.

While IT might believe the organization's content management is in good shape, users know they cannot get the information they need due to the organizational barriers. Some companies recognize this, and try to take measures to bridge the divides.

But often, the approach they take only exacerbates the problem. Here's how. Some organizations turn to social technologies to integrate departments and foster collaboration. They might bolt on a mix of tools such as social networks, blogs, and wikis onto their CMS. I refer to this as the "blog on the side" approach.

While the fundamental thinking is on target, the execution is not. When used in isolation, blogs and wikis worsen data management problems by creating additional silos of information that are not aligned with the core information repository.

Data on one topic is strewn about these sites. To find it, workers must search each site individually, a time-consuming process. If they can't find the related data or forget to search for it all together, they end up working with poorer quality information. And the silo mentality continues to rear its ugly head.

Key take-away: When traditional social media tools are added to a CMS environment, they create more silos, not less. The correct approach is a content-centric socialization of the knowledge repository.

Social knowledge networks are not about merely adding blogs and wikis to a CMS. They're about breaking down these silos and sharing what's inside. We'll explore it more next week!

To infinite search, and beyond

We're progressing down the Road to Social Knowledge Networks today, and cooling our heels at the next stop, infinite search.

This is often the next stage in an organization's content management strategy. Organizations turn to search as a way to address the No. 1 complaint they hear from workers regarding the shared network drive (or junk drawer): "I can't find anything."

The problem with search is that it fails to address the fundamental problems of poor quality content and basic disorganization. In fact, it's a lot like covering a plate of spaghetti with tomato sauce. It might look better, but the information is still a mess.



You are simply changing the place where you look for information, and move from sifting through the content on the shared drive, to sifting through the search results.

Why does search often fail to live up to its over-hyped promise? Due to one simple but often overlooked fact. Relevance is not the same as quality.

The search engine can rank and sort search results by relevance, but it cannot know anything about the quality of the document. If you want workers to find high-quality documents quickly, the search engine isn't your best option.

Here's an example. Say the shared drive contains a document drafted by marketing. Three months later, R&D revises the document and saves it under a new filename. Sales updates this version four months later, but makes several major errors and saves it under yet another filename.

The search engine will likely return all three documents when and if you do an appropriate search. They will all be relevant, because they contain the same content for the most part. But how does the worker understand that the R&D document is high quality, and the sales version has serious errors?

Just by the numbers, if 80 percent of the hard drive is outdated, irrelevant data, the search engine will yield 80 percent outdated, irrelevant data. You need a process and workflow that will do several things search engines don't do:

• Delete outdated content and eliminate erroneous information.
• Inject a quality metric into the system.
• Encourage the sourcing of high-quality content.

Without this, you do not *really* help people find the high-quality content quickly. Rather, you help them find content of dubious quality quickly. We'll be discussing how to solve these issues in a later post as we move down the Road to Social Knowledge Networks.

Key take away: Relevance is not the same as quality. Plain search just lets you find documents of dubious quality more easily.

The junk drawer of the Internet age

It's Monday. But I'm giving you an excuse to leave work (virtually) and come with me down the Road to Social Knowledge Networks. Although we won't be traveling down a yellowbrick road with a little dog in tow, and breaking out dance moves with Munchkins, we will be journeying to discover the "man behind the curtain:" what a SKN is, what it is not, and why it's important.

Got your red slippers? Then let's go!

Librarians are, naturally, attracted to the promised benefits of social knowledge networks. Many are rushing to develop and implement social libraries. Industry pundits and vendors are exploiting this interest, suggesting techniques and tools that librarians should use to socialize their libraries.

Their suggestions run the gamut from simply setting up a Facebook page or dropping in a wiki, to a complete overhaul of their knowledge management strategy and organization's IT infrastructure. Some go as far as re-engineering their entire content or knowledge management environment.

Perhaps a better approach would be to tell librarians not what to do, but rather, what to pitfalls to watch out for. And that's exactly what we're going to do here to kick off our Road to Social Knowledge Networks series.

There are several missteps to SKNs. We begin at a place called the "junk drawer."



Everyone has one, but no matter how hard we try, they just don't work to organize your stuff. Think of the drawer in your kitchen. It probably has scissors, last year’s lottery ticket, a spatula, a few old bills, and maybe a half-eaten candy cane.

In the enterprise, it's an informational junk drawer, and it constitutes the most common knowledge repository, the shared network drive.

With informational junk drawers, there is no information strategy and no shared vision for organizing content. Outdated content is not removed, and poor-quality content is not expunged. When trying to find information, it's basically every person for themselves, which usually results in wasted time and money, and knowledge that sits stagnant.

Key take away: Information is physically captured but logically lost.

This is the most disorganized information repository. It gets better from here, but slowly. Stay tuned next week when we explore Stage 2: Infinite Search.

The Road to Social Knowledge Networks

We've talked extensively about social knowledge networks, what they are, and how they work in enterprise knowledge management. But you might be wondering, How do I get there?

Wonder no more. Welcome to the first installment of the series, “The Road to Social Knowledge Networks.” Each week, I'll shed light on the concept of social knowledge networks and how social media is helping drive their creation in the enterprise.

By the end, you should have a greater understanding of what a SKN is, and, just as important, what it is not. You'll learn why SKNs are important to the enterprise, social libraries, and more, and start to see the valuable role they play in content management for almost any company.

The beauty of the blog is that it allows me to keep it short, sweet, and to the point, and opens up the forum for you to tell me what you think throughout the discussion. So keep the feedback coming!

And with that, I leave you a sneak peek into the topics you'll read about:

Stage 1: The junk drawer

Stage 2: Infinite search

Stage 3: Silo mentality

Stage 4: Separate but equal

Stage 5: Kumbaya

Stage 6: The final phase, Nirvana

What is a social knowledge network

Why you should care

What is the social volume knob

Parting thoughts

Stay tuned next week as we dive in and take a look at the evolution of information management and how we got on this road to social knowledge networks in the first place. You can set a bookmark for this address to easily check in for each new chapter. Til next time!