Page 345 -

328 Chapter 9

chapter 7), whether or not they have an intranet or other means to ensure that every-
one can connect with everyone else and access existing knowledge; as well as some
of the potential obstacles that may cause some issues with future KM implementations.
The prioritized “ wish list ” developed in the next phase serves to show where the
organization would like to be in the short-term (one to three years) and long-term
(three to fi ve years) time horizon. The gaps are thus the differences (measured by the
width of the gap) between what is and what should be and the strategy recommenda-
tions outline how the company should close these gaps.
The table of contents of a good KM strategy document is shown in table 9.3 . The
strategy should contain both diagnostic and prescriptive content. In addition, the
recommendations should not be so generic or abstract that it is not clear how they
could be implemented. In other words, the recommendations should be packaged
together with the resources needed for each recommendation such as cost and human
resources together with the required skill set and training (KM roles and responsibili-
ties are discussed in chapter 12) and a way of assessing whether or not implementation
was successful (KM metrics, discussed in chapter 10).
An illustration of the critical importance of closely aligning KM strategy to the
overall organizational business goals is described in the detailed look at Ford (box 9.5).

Balancing Innovation and Organizational Structure

Klein (1999) discusses the importance of maintaining a balance between fl uidity and
institutionalization as the dynamic equilibrium that should ideally exist between
innovation and organizational structure. The fl uid intellectual domain consists of
individuals with ideas originating and growing from a given person (intuition), per-
sonal networks that form outside formal organizational charts (CoPs), chance encoun-
ters that occur between people, and improvisation that ignores standard procedures
to discover better ways of doing things. In contrast, the organization strives to struc-
ture work, to control processes, and to measure outcomes. Explicit knowledge is clearly
defi ned in procedures, reports, memos, and databases. This knowledge is usually selec-
tively shared through offi cial chains of command or organizational hierarchies. How
then to strike the right balance?
If the organization is too fl uid, there will be no solid connection of knowledge work
to business goals, and it will be diffi cult to have clear accountability. If the balance
shifts too much in favor of institutionalization, however, the organization risks becom-
ing too formal, which can stifl e innovation and the open communication necessary
for creative work to take place (see fi gure 9.2 ).