Some Knowledge Management Factors In Determining APEK

  • Print
Details
Category: About APEK

1 Introduction

The following were some of the useful factors and information used in finalising the APEK system. They are mostly extracts from Ref 1 as reviewed on 20 March 2013 by SAA:

.1 A Clear road map of the whole system and path ahead is essential

.2 This needs a structured, systematic, disciplined, quantifiable, engineering approach to the development, implementation and progression to maturity. The highest level is perfection - an aim

.3 Maturity levels are: Default, Initial, Qualitative development, Quantitative development, Maturity, and Extended Maturity

.4 They have 5 Key areas (KA) with 20 key parameters (KP): People (6); Process(4); Technology (6); Knowledge (3); and Return on investment (1). See Fig 1

.5 A Taxonomy for domain knowledge for their Computer Division was developed and used. It has 9 categories

.6 A knowledge management portal was also developed for the Computer Division. This has facilities for submission and viewing of knowledge documents based on taxonomy and metadata. The portal is being improved for knowledge quality rating and knowledge sharing rating for knowledge workers; and planned were a domain specific discussion forum, and a database for frequently asked questions

.7 Feedback from 245 seminar participants indicated inhibiting factors:

a) Lack of user-friendly technology infrastructure
b) Lack of integration of the process of contribution with day to day work
c) Lack of awareness of knowledge requirements
d) Lack or awareness of the significance of the contribution to the organisation
e) Lack of feedback
f) Lack of awareness of the process of contribution

.8 They report the success of knowledge management depends on the active participation of employees. To help they plan on various means of recognition.

IGCAR Knowledge Management - Maturity levels and key maturity indicators (Ref 1)

2 Comment

.1 Knowledge management is essential for a large complex progressive organisation such as IGCAR. Their experience on essential elements and feedback has been valuable in fine tuning APEK.

.2 Item 7b) above has also been identified as significant in Ref 2.

3 References

.1 Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, India. Annual Report 2011 - Section on Knowledge Management pp 18-19

.2 (TBA).........................Engineers Australia..................