KMUK11 - hot and spicy, Facilitated Learning

Did it ever happen to you that you were sitting in an Indian restaurant and you could hardly breathe? Too spicy, the food? Not this time. Sofia Layton from the NHS had just handed over their KM framework in a very nicy-spicy postcard handout format, while we were waiting for the main course in this Indian restaurant (kind of KMUK11 conference dinner), and what I had in hand was really hot (at least for me).

Faciltated Learning as one of three building blocks (the other two and some other stuff, we have well covered in Ericsson). Facilitated Learning!

Okay, we have competence build-up as one of the reasons for KM, but that meant mainly the competence build-up effect that is provided by communities and knowledge assets in the databases – with all the challenges of KM described earlier.
But here Facilitated Learning had a different meaning. A meaning that explains, but does not excuses, why this was our blind spot.

The global corporate company, we always had the big picture in mind, the 90.000, not the personal KM, the knowledge exchange interaction between a hand of people.

Facilitated Learning here meant a frame of concepts that primarily look at the personal level, small units, teams. KM as people business by the word. Sometimes based on database resources (check the database on best sports shoes before you start running), the knowledge exchange appears within the team (or for Peer assist – in exchange with another team).

And some of you might have read that “often KM puts the cart before the horse” here the Before Action Review bears those precious spices that bring KM in the correct business orders: You start the project by evaluating and planning you knowledge and knowledge assets.

But to serve you the full plate:

NHS KM framework, via Sofia Layton

The NHS KM framework (I was reading here the Nick Milton’s handwriting) was composed of three blocks: Knowledge Assets, Collaboration and Facilitated Learning. All blocks were structured into “Learning Before”, “Learning During”,”Learning After”.

Thus Facilitated Learning included “Before Action Review” and “Peer Assist” in “Learning Before”, “After Action Review” in “Learning During” – as a informal short term activity for smull action junks and “Retrospect” – as more formal project closing activity in “Learning After”.

Especially the “Before –“ and “After Action Review” share common words and ground.

The “Before” has a defining character, sets the scene and formulates expectations (task, purpose, and end-state), this is essential for the “After” (as any retrospective analyis: Retrospect, Lessons Learned, etc.), as the earlier describes what was supposed to happen, the later comparing this with what really happened, analyzing the gap (why) and defining the learning.

regards

gerald

ps:

There were more two presentations towards the topic (so it is not so exotic in UK, but rather main cuisine), which I was not able to join

Ditte Kolbaek: Proactive Reviews 

Chris Collision: showing the vital importance of After Action Review in military, surgery and Formulae 1