Knowledge Retention Framework and Maturity Model

Rocio Sanz, John Hovell © 2020 – v.2
Knowledge Management, Knowledge Transfer and Knowledge Retention
Knowledge
Retention (KR)
Framework and
Maturity Model
How to accomplish
Knowledge Retention
and assess its maturity
Rocio Sanz, John Hovell © 2020 – V.2

Peer review:
☞ John Coles
☞ Dr. Lina Salazar
☞ Helen Gillman
☞ Chris Collison
☞ Focus Group KMI
☞ Patrick Burkhalter
☞ Kate Pugh
☞ Sarah Cummings
☞ Dr. John Lewis
☞ Tara Mohn, PMP, CKM
☞ Katharina Lobeck
Table of Contents
What is new
Overview Of
Knowledge Retention
1
2 Knowledge Retention
Framework
3
Knowledge Retention
Maturity Model
4 Knowledge Retention
Process
5 Addenda:
KRMM MEASUREMENT LEVEL DEFINITIONS
KRMM ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS
Version 2:
Includes a revision of
the framework and
maturity model, a
revision of the
questions and offers
a sample of the
process.
CLICK TO ACCESS ARTICLE

Is Knowledge Retention?
Section One:
Knowledge Retention
Overview
What
Who
Engages in Knowledge
Retention?
How
How to accomplish K.R.?
How to assess its maturity?
Have a KR Framework?
Have a KR Maturity Model?
Why

Bibendum
Knowledge Retention
is an organization’s capability to
retain unique and critical knowledge
WHETHER TACIT, IMPLICIT OR EXPLICIT
What
Who
sizes
Individual
Projects, small groups
Departments, programs,
functions
Organization level
Across organizations
reasons
Org. Memory
Innovation & Co-creation
Retirement & Job movement
Networks & relationships
Culture of collaboration
Expertise development
levels
Board and executive
Middle management
Individual contributor
scopes
Person
Role
Task
ways
In-person
Virtual
Blended
How
Accomplish
K.R.
Assess
maturity
K.R. Framework
Techniques
Processes
Tools
GUIDANCE
EXIT INTERVIEWS
MENTOR/PROTÉGÉ
YELLOW PAGES
PROFILES
VIDEOS
AND MANY MORE…
TEMPLATES
DATABASES
LESSONS LEARNED
APPS
WEBSITES
AND MANY MORE…
KNOWLEDGE JAM
4 STEP KR PROCESS
KMAP
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY
KNOWLEDGE CAFÉ
AND MANY MORE…
Explicit Tacit
Knowledge
Flexible and User-focus
Follows ISO 30401:2018
Under KR. Leadership
Involves Key Staff through
Interviews and Focus Groups
Baseline through 3 Levels ´
approach (questionnaire)
Impact analysis vis-à-vis KR
Framework
1
2
3
4
5
6
KR Framework
provides a single,
consistent approach for
understanding Knowledge
Retention.
The framework creates an
opportunity to broadly
understand KR.
Why
KRMM
can assess your current
status, help you gain shared
clarity on your desired
future state, and provide
recommendations for how
to achieve that desired
state.
Improve learning, memory
and performance
Avoid knowledge drain and
low employee engagement
Months/years before;
Days/weeks before or
After the knowledge is gone
INFORMATION
KNOWLEDGE
Why does this knowledge need to live on?

Challenges and barriers
Lack of buy-in
Lack of commitment
Lack of leadership
”this is how we always done things,
nothing is going to change
Cultural issues
KNOWLEDGE
KNOWLEDGE
KNOWLEDGE
“We do it, we have repositories”
Lack of follow through and application
“I already know everything”
“I don’t like
that person” “I have nothing to
learn from you”
“Will I lose my
job if I share?”
Other common barriers
Time issues
Lack of governance
Concerns about litigations
Lack of a central repository
Definition of K Transfer and Retention “Faster to start
from scratch”
“I don’t have time”
Resistance to share and receive
Not seen as central to performance management
Fear of being exposed - not being prepared
Not part of process improvement
Poor dissemination and application of lessons learned
KR not recognized as a process
Senior management

KRF provides a single,
consistent approach for
understanding Knowledge
Retention.
The framework creates an
opportunity to broadly
understand KR.
Section Two:
Knowledge Retention Framework
(KRF)

Creating awareness &
understanding
Improving,
Learning and Measuring
Defining purpose & stakeholders
Knowledge Mgmt
Buy-in
KM strategy available. KM Maturity
KM balance: people, process and
technology
Knowledge flows
KM policies and governance
Culture towards collaboration
Senior management engagement
Org. Culture and Context
Stakeholders
Why & Purpose
Process Definition
Feasibility impact
Prog. Definition
What is the overall organizational purpose for Knowledge
Retention?
Is it for retirees or organization capabilities? Is it for individuals,
teams or the organization? How much time do you have?
Stakeholder analysis: Who has the knowledge? Who needs the
knowledge? What are each of their needs?
How long will the knowledge be valuable? Does the knowledge
focus on a person, a role or a capability? Have you considered
knowledge about people, process, and technology?
Which polarities do you need to manage, and how? Which
process(es) enable Knowledge Retention?
Are there feedback loops and continuous
improvement examples?
What is the feedback from our
customers and stakeholders?
What is the quality of our processes?
How much are we learning, and how
quickly?
What is important for us to measure?
What tools do you use to measure and
visualize and analyze the data?
Learning
Measurement
Feedback
The KR Framework
K. Gaps

Section Three:
Knowledge Retention
Maturity Model
“Maturity relates to the degree of formality and optimization of
processes; from ad-hoc practices to formally defined steps, to
manage results metrics, to active optimization of the processes."
KM Teaching Group Universitas Telkom

01
02
03
04
05
Lesser
Retention
Higher
Retention
Level 01
Initial
Ad-hoc
Level 02
Repeateable
but inconsistent
Level 03
Defined
processes Level 04
Managed
and measurable
Level 05
Optimized
KR Maturity Model:
The 5 levels of KR Maturity
Awareness and
understanding
Stakeholders
and Processes
Improvement
Learning and
Measuring
3
Areas
of
assessment
Shared clarity and context
Judicious alignment of
needs and resources
Sustainable checks
and balances

01
02
03
04
05
Lesser
Retention
Higher
Retention
Level 01
Initial
Ad-hoc
Level 02
Repeateable
but inconsistent
Level 03
Defined
processes Level 04
Managed
and measurable
Level 05
Optimized
KR Maturity Model:
The 5 levels of KR Maturity
Awareness and
understanding
Stakeholders
and Processes
Improvement
Learning and
Measuring
3
Areas
of
assessment
KM assessment
Capacity assessment
KR approach assessment
Stakeholder assessment
Infrastructure assessment
Processes assessment
Performance assessment
Learning application assessment
Measurement assessment

UNDERSTAND ENGAGEMENT TO KM
Management engagement, culture and possibility to
improve KR with KM processes and systems
UNDERSTAND CAPABILITIES TO RECOGNIZE AND APPLY
KNOWLEDGE From complete dependence on individual
skills and abilities to expertise integration and knowledge
leverage
UNDERSTAND CURRENT APPROACH TO KNOWLEDGE
RETENTION AND ASPIRATIONAL APPROACH
Where "they believe they are" and "where they want to be"
UNDERSTAND INVOLVEMENT OF CRITICAL STAKEHOLDERS
in enforcing knowledge retention and supporting learning and
career development / motivation and incentives
UNDERSTAND HOW STAKEHOLDERS CONTRIBUTE OR
NOT TO THE RETENTION OF CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE
Search and finding, usability, knowledge elicitation
UNDERSTAND HOW STRUCTURE, PROCESSES AND
TOOLS CONTRIBUTE TO KNOWLEDGE RETENTION OF
TACIT, IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
UNDERSTAND WHETHER K-RETENTION IS CONSIDERED
AS PART OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Relation to knowledge-drain / loss and how important is
retention to performance
UNDERSTAND HOW LEARNING CONTRIBUTES TO PERFORMANCE
Impact of learning and application beyond statistics
UNDERSTAND HOW THE K. RETENTION STRATEGY, PROCESSES
AND SYSTEMS IMPACT ON THE ORGANIZATION´S PERFORMANCE
AND THE IMPACT OF KNOWLEDGE LOSS
AWARENESS AND
UNDERSTANDING
STAKEHOLDERS AND
PROCESSES
IMPROVEMENT
LEARNING AND
MEASURING

Levels
§ Level 01: Initial ad-hoc
§ Level 02: Repeatable but inconsistent
§ Level 03: Defined process
§ Level 04: Managed and measurable
§ Level 05: Optimized
Example: Assessment Result & Visual
KM ASSESSMENT
CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
KR APPROACH ASSESSMENT
STAKEHOLDERS ASSESSMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
PROCESSES ASSESSMENT
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
LEARNING APPL. ASSESSMENT
MEASUREMENT ASSESSMENT
01 02 03 04 05
LEVEL
AWARENESS AND
UNDERSTANDING
STAKEHOLDERS
AND PROCESSES
IMPROVEMENT,
LEARNING AND
MEASURING

01 02 03 04 05
This is where you
think you are
Where you wish
to reach
Example: Final Assessment Result
This is where you
actually are
KM ASSESSMENT
CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
KR APPROACH ASSESSMENT
STAKEHOLDERS ASSESSMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
PROCESSES ASSESSMENT
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
LEARNING APPL. ASSESSMENT
MEASUREMENT ASSESSMENT
LEVEL 01 02 03 04 05
01 02 03 04 05

Section Four:
Knowledge Retention
Process Are we
thinking like
small
organizations
?

Starting a team, document,
share results.
Tactical Process
What is it that you need?
Assessment Process
Objectives, track status,
funding levels, resource
tracking.
Programme Process
Are we
thinking like
small
organizations
?
Initial assessment
Where do you want to work?
Is there an area the you already know you would like to work to improve?
Do you need a clear picture? maybe maturity model can help you understand better
Have you considered the Framework as supporting tool? How well is the situation?
How is it handled?
How is it delivered?
How is it performed?
How is it shared?

START
5. REFLECTION
& LEARNING
4. IMPLEMENTATION
3 ASSESSMENT
TOOLS
DEFINITION
2
B
A
S
E
L
I
N
E
1
OBJECTIVE
What is it that you need?
Where do you think you are
WHERE DO YOU THINK THAT KR IS HAPPENING
Interviews / focus
groups with key
stakeholders
Where you actually are
MATURITY MODEL COMPARISON
Where you want to go
Agree on scope,
timeframe, tools
Assess Info sharing processes,
and k drain/ risk critical points
Identify the needs,
who is involved,
what resources are
available
Assessment
Process:
Show advancements
In-depth
assessment
Reporting, document lessons learned
and good practices, recommendations
How your part contributes to the whole
Reflect,
Document,
Recommend
Gain shared clarity
of the need of KR
Set-up Baseline
based on priorities
Detail analysis of
required part:
focus, needs, gaps,
etc
RE-START

• Understand the context, culture and
support
• Timeframe and resources
• What capacity there is to carry out the
system and transfer knowledge (SWOT)
• Is there any specific approach, formal,
ad-hoc, informal? Good practices?
• Why are we retaining knowledge in
movements?
• Which movements? onboarding, transfer,
departure
• Who are the key stakeholders in the process:
HR, PROGRAMME TEAM, ITC, ETC. - when and how to
involve them?
• Feasibility impact:
• WHAT KNOWLEDGE:
• PERSON/ROLE/TASK
• DATA/DOCUMENTS
• SKILLS / METHODS / TALENT / EXPERIENCE
• NETWORKS
• WHAT TOOLS/SYSTEMS/PROCESSES
do we need to prevent from knowledge drain,
identify and use critical and unique knowledge and
prevent from reinventing the wheel? (explicit,
implicit, tacit)
• Knowledge gaps: map needs, priorities and lack of
access to critical knowledge at various stages
• Is the retention approach systematized?
• Is it reviewed? Who participates in the
revision? How often?
• What have we learned from the previous
retention initiatives?
• Is the knowledge transferred being
used?
• How can we measure it? What is the
impact?
• How is the system sustained?
• Are we mapping knowledge life cycles?
• Assess improvement vis-à-vis Maturity
Model
Org. Memory
Innovation & Co-creation
Retirement & Job movement
Networks & relationships
Culture of collaboration
Expertise development
reasons
How do you work-on with staff movements?
ASSESSMENT:
How to create an ongoing process that contributes to a culture of retention, access and transfer

One-to-One / Job-Specific Revision
One-to-specific group
(Leadership, HQ, Managers)
One-to-individual/group/all
Job Profile / Map / Critical Tasks Review
Competence Mapping / Transition Plan
Knowledge Loss Risk Assessment
Key contact Template
Handover report
Exit Interview (smart questioning)
After Action Review
Check sheets
The Bible
Profile tasks priority definition
Lessons learnt review
The Wave
Organization Journey Map & Trends Analysis
Job Shadowing / Apprenticeship
On-the job training / Coaching / Mentoring
Mentoring / Active Senior
Subject-matter expert part-time support /
consultancies / short-term job bank
One-to-group/all Emeritus programmes
Wise/elderly support group
History Scan / The Wave / Trends
After Action Review / In-depth interview
Group problem solving
Revision annotated regulations
Specific Institutional Memory revision
In-depth lessons learnt revision
History Scan
Communities of Practice / Social networking
Blogs / Wikis / Discussion Forums
Ted chats (podcasts, videos, audio)
Participation on-line Communities and
Social networks
Blogs / Wikis / Discussion Forums
Ted chats (podcasts, videos, audio)
Knowledge Café / Coffee Roulette
Legacy talks / Oral stories / Storytelling
Knowledge markets / fairs
Knowledge Café / Coffee Roulette
Legacy Talks / Oral stories / Storytelling
Knowledge Market / Fairs
Publications, Memoirs
Participation at Trainings, Conferences
Collaboration on e-learning tools,
guidelines, tutorials, etc
Publications / Memoirs
Ad-hoc participation in trainings, Conferences,
Ad-hoc support to develop specific training tools
TACIT KNOWLEDGE
External support coaching

Addendum 1:
KRMM Measurement Level Definitions
03
02
01

3 AREAS TO KR ASSESSMENT LEVEL 1:
INITIAL AC-HOC
LEVEL 2:
REPEATABLE BUT
INTUITIVE
LEVEL 3:
DEFINED PROCESS
LEVEL 4:
MANAGED AND
MEASURABLE
LEVEL 5:
OPTIMIZED
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100%
AWARENESS AND
UNDERSTANDING
Share clarity and
context
KM
Assessment
UNDERSTAND ENGAGEMENT TO KM
Management engagement,
culture and possibility to improve
KR with KM processes and
systems
No KM approach / vision
No management
engagement
No supporting culture
Ad-hoc processes and
systems but no focus on KR
KM Strategy may or not be
created but management is
not on board nor the culture
helps. Depends on individual
to retain the knowledge. Little
retention but no systems to
support.
KM may or not be in place but
there are processes and
systems that support
retention. Management may
be involved and a
collaborative systems conduce
to a supportive culture
KM in place supporting KR
structures and processes.
Senior management on board
promoting a collaborative
culture. Systems and process
in place to set retention.
Measurement targets the
process.
= level 4 +
Feedback mechanisms.
Measurement targets the
impact and improves upon
Capacity
Assessment
UNDERSTAND CAPABILITIES TO
RECOGNIZE AND APPLY KNOWLEDGE
From complete dependence on
individual skills and abilities to
expertise integration and
knowledge leverage
DEFAULT: Complete
dependence on individual
skills and abilities.
REACTIVE: Ability to perform
tasks constituting the basic
business of the organization
repeatably
AWARE: restricted ability for
data-driven decision making.
Restricted ability to leverage
internal expertise. Ability to
manage virtual teams well.
CONVINCED: Quantitative
decision making for strategic
and operational applications
widespread. High ability to
leverage internal and external
sources of expertise.
SHARING: Ability to manage
organizational competence
quantitatively. Strong ROI-
driven decision making.
Streamlined process for
leveraging new ideas for
business advantage.
KR Approach
Assessment
UNDERSTAND CURRENT APPROACH TO
KNOWLEDGE RETENTION AND
ASPIRATIONAL APPROACH
Where "they believe they are"
and "where they want to be”
No KR strategy or vision
Ad-hoc experiences, no
critical K identification. Self-
assessment is voluntary.
Efforts may vary but there is a
vision and identification of
critical and unique knowledge.
No revision. Employee self-
assessment is generally done.
There is a vision. Clear
awareness of “knowledge
drain” and definition of critical
knowledge. Employee self-
assessment is signed by
supervisor and used during
movements.
There is a vision. Clear roles
and responsibilities.
Awareness and efforts to
prevent knowledge drain.
Critical and unique knowledge
is prioritized. Feedback from
employee self-assessment to
drive the project.
= level 4 +
Measurement – revision
scheduled of critical
knowledge and update.
Feedback mechanisms.
Assess impact of KR.

INITIAL AC-HOC
LEVEL 2:
REPEATABLE BUT
INTUITIVE
LEVEL 3:
DEFINED PROCESS
LEVEL 4:
MANAGED AND
MEASURABLE
LEVEL 5:
OPTIMIZED
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100%
STAKEHOLDERS
AND PROCESSES
Judicious
alignment of
needs and
resources
Stakeholders
Assessment
UNDERSTAND INVOLVEMENT OF
CRITICAL STAKEHOLDERS
in enforcing knowledge retention and
supporting learning and career
development / motivation and
incentives
Critical Stakeholders
do not enforce
retention practices.
EG. HUMAN RESOURCES:
Retention is not part of
Personnel TORs.
Mapping of staff but not
shared. No mapping of
jobs or critical
knowledge. Some exit
interviews and handover
but more as protocol
than feedback.
There are some retention
practices, some very
personal driven. Not clarity,
when these champions
disappear, so do the
retention practices.
Personnel participates in staff
movements with “retention
approach” – and develop
demographic profiles shared
ahead. Smart interviews and
handover reports with feedback
mechanisms and. mentoring
There are some standardized
processes across the
organization.
Develop demographic profiles and
movements considering career
development. Incentives and
contribute to sharing culture and
motivation. Job maps are established
across and development of policies for
K- Retention. Practices include job
shadowing, knowledge cafes,
storytelling.
= level 3 plus policy
development for knowledge
retention. Involved in
definition of critical and
unique knowledge: critical –
task review and prioritization.
=level 4 plus feedback impact
assessments and constant
improvement. 4 step-KR
Process.
Infrastructure
Assessment
UNDERSTAND HOW STAKEHOLDERS
CONTRIBUTE OR NOT TO THE RETENTION
OF CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE
Search and finding, usability,
knowledge elicitation
Little involvement
All process rely on
infrastructure technology.
Limited sharing processes.
IT participates in developing
retention systems.
Infrastructure technology
become relevant for retention.
Some defined processes consider
User´s request.
Support findability, usability,
search, elicitation. (low)
involved in learning and
improving.
Support findability, usability,
search, elicitation. (high)
Machine learning.
Processes Assessment
UNDERSTAND HOW STRUCTURE, PROCESSES
AND TOOLS CONTRIBUTE TO KNOWLEDGE
RETENTION OF TACIT, IMPLICIT AND
EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
Preservation and
transfer methods
individual-driven.
One way "pushed"
communications
Some tacit and implicit
knowledge shared heavy on
technology. Low - feedback
without trust/safety, not
honest or candid, sugar
coated
Critical skills definition.
Technology and individual
collaboration and sharing. Low
trust. Tacit implicit and explicit
knowledge considered. Low trust.
Low - feedback with trust/safety,
honest or candid in small
groups/teams/projects
Balance based on needs btw
technology and individual.
Trust
Distinction between
preservation, acquisition and
transfer according to needs
and audiences.
High (automation, machine
learning)
Systems thinking
Example: High - feedback
with trust / safety / honest /
candid at program/dept level
- with double loop learning -
visible improvement - giving
back - reciprocate

INITIAL AC-HOC
LEVEL 2:
REPEATABLE BUT
INTUITIVE
LEVEL 3:
DEFINED PROCESS
LEVEL 4:
MANAGED AND
MEASURABLE
LEVEL 5:
OPTIMIZED
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100%
IMPROVEMENT,
LEARNING AND
MEASURING
Sustainable checks
and balances
Performance
Assessment
UNDERSTAND WHETHER K-RETENTION
IS CONSIDERED AS PART OF
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Relation to knowledge-drain /
loss and how important is
retention to performance
Resistance to share and
receive. Tendency to
reinvent the wheel.
Retention is not linked to
performance. No
accountability. K- shared
ad-hoc based-on contacts.
Individual - driven
Resistance to share. Lower
tendency to reinvent the
wheel. No accountability.
Some tacit knowledge
shared heavy on
technology. Not
accountable.
Identification of unique and
critical knowledge as part of
performance. Acknowledge
learning from the past.
Accountability.
Critical and unique knowledge is
shared across departments.
And adapt old. Self assessment
is part of performance. Explicit
and tacit knowledge are
considered. Collaboration is
incentivized. Accountability
Performance continues growing.
Collaboration allows
improvement with creativity and
innovation. Accountability. Self
assessment is essential for
performance development.
Learning
Application
Assessment
UNDERSTAND HOW LEARNING
CONTRIBUTES TO PERFORMANCE
Impact of learning and
application beyond statistics
Learning relies on the
individual.
Learning is provided but
not assessed.
Learning is part of the system.
Track and monitor learning.
Analysis of who receives what
training.
Learning is part of the system.
Limited assessment of impact of
learning.
Critical learning impacts
performance.
Learning and application.
Measured + Feedback to
improve.
Measurement
Assessment
UNDERSTAND HOW THE K. RETENTION
STRATEGY, PROCESSES AND SYSTEMS
IMPACT ON THE ORGANIZATION´S
PERFORMANCE AND THE IMPACT OF
KNOWLEDGE LOSS
No measurement
Some measurement of the
process
Measure the process
Measure the process and
impact
Measure on impact and improve
upon.

Addendum 2:
KRMM Assessment Guiding Questions
03
02
01

AWARENESS AND
UNDERSTANDING
UNDERSTAND ENGAGEMENT TO KM. Management engagement, culture and possibility to
improve KR with KM processes and systems
UNDERSTAND CAPABILITIES TO RECOGNIZE AND APPLY KNOWLEDGE FROM
COMPLETE DEPENDENCE ON INDIVIDUAL SKILLS AND ABILITIES TO EXPERTISE
INTEGRATION AND KNOWLEDGE LEVERAGE
UNDERSTAND CURRENT APPROACH TO KNOWLEDGE RETENTION AND ASPIRATIONAL
APPROACH - WHERE "THEY BELIEVE THEY ARE" AND "WHERE THEY WANT TO BE"
Supporting Questions
Consider The Following Questions As Optional
Guide, There Is No Need To Use Them All.
01 02 03 04 05
LEVEL
KM
ASSESSMENT
No KM approach /
vision
No management
engagement
No supporting
culture
Ad-hoc processes
and systems but no
focus on KR
KM Strategy may or
not be created but
management is not
on board nor the
culture helps.
Depends on individual
to retain the
knowledge. Little
retention but no
systems to support.
KM may or not be in
place but there are
processes and
systems that
support retention.
Management may
be involved and a
collaborative
systems conduce to
a supportive culture
KM in place supporting
KR structures and
processes. Senior
management on board
promoting a
collaborative culture.
Systems and process in
place to set retention.
Measurement targets
the process.
KM in place
supporting KR
structures and
processes. Senior
management on
board promoting a
collaborative culture.
Systems and process
in place to set
retention.
Measurement targets
the process.
CAPACITY
ASSESSMENT
DEFAULT:
Complete
dependence on
individual skills
and abilities.
REACTIVE: Ability to
perform tasks
constituting the basic
business of the
organization
repeatably
AWARE: restricted
ability for data-
driven decision
making. Restricted
ability to leverage
internal expertise.
Ability to manage
virtual teams well.
CONVINCED:
Quantitative decision
making for strategic
and operational
applications
widespread. High
ability to leverage
internal and external
sources of expertise.
SHARING: Ability to
manage organizational
competence
quantitatively. Strong
ROI-driven decision
making. Streamlined
process for leveraging
new ideas for business
advantage.
KR APPROACH
ASSESSMENT
No KR strategy or
vision
Ad-hoc experiences,
no critical K
identification. Self-
assessment is
voluntary.
Efforts may vary but
there is a vision and
identification of
critical and unique
knowledge. No
revision. Employee
self-assessment is
generally done.
There is a vision.
Clear awareness of
“knowledge drain”
and definition of
critical knowledge.
Employee self-
assessment is signed
by supervisor and
used during
movements.
There is a vision. Clear
roles and
responsibilities.
Awareness and efforts
to prevent knowledge
drain. Critical and
unique knowledge is
prioritized. Feedback
from employee self-
assessment to drive the
project.
= level 4 +
Measurement –
revision scheduled
of critical
knowledge and
update. Feedback
mechanisms. Assess
impact of KR.
Tip: KEY TO UNDERSTAND 3 ASPECTS: SENIOR MANAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT TO KM AND KR PROCESSES, CULTURE ORIENTED TO COLLABORATION AND TRUST AND
AVAILABILITY OF KM PROCESSES AND SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT KR.
1. STRATEGY & VISION THAT MEETS BUSINESS GOALS
Is there a KM approach? Is the KM approach responding business goals?
2. SENIOR MANAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT
Is the senior management / leadership in line with/understand a KM approach? Is the senior management supportive of KM? Is the senior management supportive of KR?
3. SUPPORTING CULTURE OF COLLABORATION
What are the values that are important to the organization? What are the values that are important to the organization? Root cause of difficult problems. Relation to history. Rigid vs
flexible approach / limits - frameworks / space for creativity and innovation. Approach to "critical thinking”. Credibility and "personalization"
4. KMPROCESSES
Are there KM processes in place? Are they aware of the processes as K-related? Are the processes flexible and adaptable to the needs? Is there a readiness to improve processes?
5. KMSYSTEMS / TECHNOLOGY / TOOL
Are there KM systems in place? Are they aware of the systems as K-related? Are the systems flexible and adaptable to the needs? Is there a readiness to improve systems?
Tip: UNDERSTAND THE CAPACITIES TO RECOGNIZE AND APPLY NEW KNOWLEDGE, TO IDENTIFY ”CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE” AND THE LEVEL OF DEPENDENCY FROM THE
INDIVIDUAL SKILLS AND ABILITIES TO EXPERTISE INTEGRATION AND KNOWLEDGE LEVERAGE.
Purposes: benchmarking, recognition, understanding/awareness of KR, mm work inside my org for funding and productivity improvement. Understand our suffering, aware of
knowledge drain, to establish system to relieve the suffering - where we are and where we want to go.
Related to culture:
the way things are doing around here.
What is the usual process when new knowledge arrives - how is it handled / recorded / saved / codified / shared?
.
Tip: UNDERSTAND THE ASPIRATIONAL MODEL AND THE CURRENT EFFORTS AND WHERE THEY THINK THEY ARE
1. AVAILABLE K.R. STRATEGY THAT RESPONDS TO KMVISION/BUSINESS GOALS
What is the current strategy is there is one? How the corporate memory is constructed? One department in charge or each one does they way? How the knowledge retention plans are
coordinated? What are the challenges they foresee to the current approach? Where do they aspire to be?
2. AVAILABLE A K.R. PLAN(S) WITH ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Is there a clear distribution of roles and responsibilities : who does what? Is it homogeneous by department? Does it include a distribution of roles by individuals / teams / organization? (or
just an organizational approach) Is it institutionalized? Or "flexible and not compulsory" approach?
3. INCLUDES APPROACH TO "AT RISK KNOWLEDGE" / K. LOST /DRAIN
Is there an awareness to knowledge at risk / k. lost / k. drain? Is it specific approach by department / teams or generic? Is there any measure to counteract? (individual / teams-departments /
formal - informal / generic-organizational?
4. INCLUDES PRIORITIZATION OF CRITICAL/UNIQUE KNOWLEDGE
Is there an awareness of what is "critical knowledge"? Is this "critical knowledge" defined by individuals / teams / organization? Who determines what is critical? Is there a formal or informal
process? Is there a way to prioritize critical knowledge? How?
5. CONSISTENCY & PERSISTENCY
How often the "critical knowledge" is revised? Is there schedule for revision? 0-6 moths / 6m to 1 year / 1 years – more. How the critical knowledge is monitored / reviewed ? Is there a
process of revision and approval? Are there feedback mechanisms in place? Is there a critical approach to define what is relevant? Double loop learning? How is new knowledge acquire and
introduce? How does it remain? Personalized - institutionalized? Are there resources / staff allocated to this process / just informal / ad-hoc? Are there KEY performance indicators? If so- how
do they transfer critical information? Feedback? motivation / incentives to K-Retention and Transfer?
6. EMPLOYEE SELF-ASSESSMENT
Are there process where the individual determines what is critical to their position? Is there is, is this supervised? Is there a process? How this critical knowledge is passed on? Is it
institutionalized? Is there a process?

UNDERSTAND INVOLVEMENT OF CRITICAL STAKEHOLDERS
IN ENFORCING KNOWLEDGE RETENTION AND SUPPORTING LEARNING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT / MOTIVATION
AND INCENTIVES
UNDERSTAND HOW STAKEHOLDERS CONTRIBUTE OR NOT TO THE RETENTION OF
CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE. Search and finding, usability, knowledge elicitation
UNDERSTAND HOW STRUCTURE, PROCESSES AND TOOLS CONTRIBUTE TO
KNOWLEDGE RETENTION OF TACIT, IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
01 02 03 04 05
LEVEL
INFRASTRUCTURE
ASSESSMENT
Little
involvement
All process rely on
infrastructure
technology. Limited
sharing processes.
IT participates in
developing
retention systems.
Infrastructure
technology
become relevant
for retention.
Some defined
processes consider
User´s request.
Support findability,
usability, search,
elicitation. (low)
involved in learning
and improving.
Support findability,
usability, search,
elicitation. (high)
Machine learning.
PROCESSES
ASSESSMENT
Preservation and
transfer methods
individual-driven.
One way "pushed"
communications
Some tacit and
implicit knowledge
shared heavy on
technology. Low -
feedback without
trust/safety, not
honest or candid,
sugar coated
Critical skills definition.
Technology and
individual
collaboration and
sharing. Low trust.
Tacit implicit and
explicit knowledge
considered. Low trust.
Low - feedback with
trust/safety, honest or
candid in small
groups/teams/projects
Balance based on needs
btw technology and
individual. Trust
Distinction between
preservation,
acquisition and transfer
according to needs and
audiences.
High (automation,
machine learning)
Systems thinking
Example: High -
feedback with trust
/ safety / honest /
candid at
program/dept level
- with double loop
learning - visible
improvement -
giving back -
reciprocate
Tip: KEY TO UNDERSTAND THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT TO ENSURE RETENTION BOTH AS INSTITUTIONALIZATION REFERENCE AS WELL AS
DURING THE ACTUAL MOMENTS THAT REQUIRE TRANSFER AND RETENTION OF CRITICAL AND UNIQUE KNOWLEDGE
1. DEMOGRAPHIC -PROFILES & MOVEMENTS
Does HR/Personnel assess the demographic approach and movements of staff? Is it shared? With whom? How often?
2. JOB-MAPS DEVELOPMENT COORDINATED WITH UNITS
Is there a mapping of every job, roles, relation, critical k., how does it work in terms of requirements, solutions, processes, relations with others, etc. If there is a mapping who develops it? The
individual / department / HR-personnel? Is this mapping Taken into consideration for staff development and movements? Does the mapping identify what is critical knowledge and if so to whom
should be transferred? Is the learning and training included into the mapping? Are a minimum required skills per position taken into consideration when selecting staff or it is sometimes "flexible”.
3 ROTATION/MOVEMENTS CONSIDER STAFF CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Do movements and rotation take into consideration career development? Or are they based on statistics? Do movement ensure knowledge retention process in an institutionalized manner? Are
these processes standard? Are they always applied? Is feedback included to improve processes? Who is involved in the rotation processes? Are supervisors involved to ensure critical knowledge
retention? Is enough time provided to ensure proper k. transfer and retention?
4. COORDINATED POLICIES TO RETAIN CRITICAL & UNIQUE K.
Has personnel established a policy for k. retention before movements / rotation / separation? Is Personnel involved in the identification / approval of critical knowledge and retention processes?
Has personnel a way of tracking critical knowledge?
5. ORG´S APPROACH TO ACQUIRE - TRANSFER & RETAIN K
Does personnel encourage critical knowledge transfer and retention? Is personnel in charge of institutionalization of measures? Is this considered related too staff development?
6. PROCESSESS AND TOOLS ARE USED: EXIT INTERVIEWS, HAND OVER REPORTS, ETC - Which methods are used for that?
Tip: CONSIDER THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT, SUPPORT VS RESISTANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT.
1 LINKAGES WITH IT and RETENTION PROCESSES
How IT influence senior management / leadership decisions? What is the role and involvement of IT in processes development? Has IT anything to do towards recording /
ensuring archive of critical knowledge?
2. TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE (BARRIER?)
Is technology infrastructure considered a barrier?
Does every new system / dbase establish paths/linkages with previous / old ones? How old data is managed / archived / is there a way to recuperate it? Search / findability /
usability approach towards k. retention systems
.
Tip: CONSIDER THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT , SUPPORT VS RESISTANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT
1. HEAVY ON TECHNOLOGY VS INDIVIDUAL
Where is the focus on retention? Is there a balance? Communication and sharing patterns? Documentation and codification
2 RELATION OF TRUST & DEVELOPMENT
What are the motivational factors for knowledge transfer? Is the critical knowledge prioritized? Who determines the prioritization? How the old knowledge is archived? Who has access to it?
Is there a knowledge lost risk assessment?
3 CRITICAL SKILLS DEFINITION
Is there steps defined to minimize the impact of knowledge lost? How critical knowledge is captured? Is there a strategy / plan / process to identify knowledge at risk? is there a distinction in
retention between knowledge and skills ? Is there a mapping /inventory of critical skills / tasks / priorities / objectives?
Who knows about it? Who does it?
4 KNOWLEDGE PRESERVATION METHODS AND TOOLS (EXPLICIT)
What tools and methods are used to preserve explicit knowledge?
5. KNOWLEDGE PRESERVATION METHODS AND TOOLS (TACIT)
What tools and methods are used to preserve tacit knowledge?
6. METHODS FOR KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
Common methods for k. transfer
7. METHOD FOR ACQUISITION OF NEWKNOWLEDG
Who identifies new knowledge? How this is being shared / archived / codified? Who knows about it?
STAKEHOLDERS AND
PROCESSES
STAKEHOLDERS
ASSESSMENT
Critical
Stakeholders do
not enforce
retention
practices
There are some
retention practices,
some very personal
driven. Not clarity,
when these
champions disappear,
so do the retention
practices.
There are some
standardized
processes across
the organization.
= level 3 plus policy
development for
knowledge
retention. Involved
in definition of
critical and unique
knowledge: critical –
task review and
prioritization.
=level 4 plus
feedback impact
assessments and
constant
improvement. 4
step-KR Process.

UNDERSTAND WHETHER K-RETENTION IS CONSIDERED AS PART OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Relation to knowledge-drain / loss and how important is retention to performance
UNDERSTAND HOW LEARNING CONTRIBUTES TO PERFORMANCE
Impact of learning and application beyond statistics
UNDERSTAND HOW THE K. RETENTION STRATEGY, PROCESSES AND SYSTEMS
IMPACT On the organization´s performance and the impact of knowledge loss
01 02 03 04 05
LEVEL
No measurement Some measurement
of the process
Measure the process Measure the process
and impact
Measure on impact
and improve upon.
Tip: KEY TO UNDERSTAND HOW KNOWLEDGE RETENTION IMPACTS PERFORMANCE AND THE LEVEL OF AWARENESS. WHETHER OR NOT
THERE IS A STRATEGY TO IDENTIFY UNIQUE AND CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE
1. COLLABORATIVE CULTURE VS RESISTANCE TO SHARE: MOTIVATION INCENTIVES.
Ways of collaboration: flexibility - rigid / formal – informal. Is sharing rewarded / is it something everybody does in the same way? Is there trust in the processes of sharing/collaborating. How
sharing / retaining and transfer done around here?
2. APPROACH TO ACCOUNTABILITY.
Is there accountability in the process? - or retention is left to good will. Do people feel accountable for retaining and transfer critical knowledge? Does the process of retention encourage staff
to share critical knowledge?
3. TYPE OF KNOWLEDGE SHARED
Type of knowledge shared: context, relationship / contacts, person/role/task, history, project, architecture (where to find what?), parameters, group/department, basic education. How is
"knowledge at risk” identified? Formal-informal / flexible-rigid?
4. COMMON WAYS OF TRANSFER KNOWLEDGE.
What are the "usual" ways to transfer knowledge? Is there a distinction and understanding between Tacit, implicit and explicit knowledge? Is it focus on explicit knowledge only? Or also
includes tacit knowledge? Is there an awareness of explicit (20% technology focus) and tacit (80% human focus?) where is the balance / equilibrium?
5. COMMONN WAYS OF RETAINING KNOWLEDGE.
What are the "most common" ways to retain knowledge? Are they aware of the % of knowledge lost?
6. CAPACITY TO BRING BACK AND ADAPT OLD KNOWLEDGE.
Are there pre-established ways to retain and reuse old knowledge. Is it reusing for the sake of doing it or is there a critical approach to improve what is was done? Approach to not reinventing
the wheel. Who determines who the knowledge is re-used and adapted?
7. UNIQUE AND CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE - SELF ASSESSMENT.
What kind of knowledge / skills do you now have that the organization will miss most when you leave? If you had to leave the organization suddenly, what are the critical issues that you need
to inform / ensure they are passed on. Looking back what are the things you wished you had been taught early on in your job that you eventually learned? Key resources (procedures, manuals
etc) that you use to do your job. What roles ("hats") do you play? What are the key evident and not evident activities that you normally carry out. What are the key resources / contacts / info
flows. Are they any important type of knowledge at risk when you go? Any issue you are worried about? How did you learn the things you know? What were the critical training programmes?
How to use programmes / tools / equipment / systems.
Tip: CONSIDER HOW LEARNING CONTRIBUTES TO PERFORMANCE AND CONSTANT IMPROVEMENT
1. DOUBLE LOOP LEARNING VS SINGLE LOOP - (M&E)
How the organization learns? Is it thought to be critical thinking? Is there space for questioning? And improving? Are there the internal process for assessment / M&E
contribute to improvements?
Are there processes for self- / department / organization evaluation contribute to improve systems and processes? Do they contribute to performance?
2. APPROACH TO FEEDBACK
Does staff feel entitled to provide "critical and constructive feedback? Is feedback taken into consideration to "continuously improving"
3. TRACK AND MONITOR (LEARNING MEASUREMENT)
Who determines what to improve? Is there a way to track and measure learning and k. at risk?
4. IMPACT OF LEARNING AND APPLICATION
How learning is applied and measured? Mindset towards change
.
Tip: CONSIDER NOT ONLY MONITORING THE PROCESSES BUT ALSO THE IMPACT OF KR ON PERFORMANCE. MEASUREMENT REQUIRES
MEASURING THE PROCESSES AS WELL AS IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE
1. M&E
Monitoring and evaluation of k-retention plans and strategy
Assess plan for knowledge at risk
Assess impact and credibility of k-retention plan / strategy
Measurement of impact of knowledge transfer
Measurement of impact of learning in performance
Impact of collaboration
Flows of information
Effectiveness of knowledge transfer
2. ONA
ONA (organization network analysis)
assess flows of information sharing
IMPROVEMENT, LEARNING
AND LEARNING
Resistance to
share and receive.
Tendency to
reinvent the
wheel. Retention
is not linked to
performance. No
accountability. K-
shared ad-hoc
based-on contacts.
Individual - driven
Resistance to share.
Lower tendency to
reinvent the wheel.
No accountability.
Some tacit knowledge
shared heavy on
technology. Not
accountable.
Identification of
unique and critical
knowledge as part
of performance.
Acknowledge
learning from the
past.
Accountability.
Critical and unique
knowledge is shared
across departments.
And adapt old. Self
assessment is part of
performance. Explicit
and tacit knowledge
are considered.
Collaboration is
incentivized.
Accountability
Performance continues
growing.
Collaboration allows
improvement with
creativity and
innovation.
Accountability. Self
assessment is essential
for performance
development.
PERFORMANCE
ASSESSMENT
Learning relies
on the
individual.
Learning is provided
but not assessed.
Learning is part of
the system. Track
and monitor
learning. Analysis
of who receives
what training
Learning is part of the
system. Limited
assessment of impact
of learning.
Critical learning
impacts performance.
Learning and
application.
Measured + Feedback
to improve.
LEARNING
APPLICATION
ASSESSMENT
MEASUREMENT
ASSESSMENT

§ Rsanz7117@gmail.com
§ http://www.linkedin.com/in/rocio-sanz
Rocio Sanz John Hovell
§ John.Hovell@STRATactical.com
§ http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JohnHovell1
Contact information:

Knowledge Retention Framework and Maturity Model

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Knowledge Retention Framework and Maturity Model

Ähnlich wie Knowledge Retention Framework and Maturity Model (20)

Mehr von SIKM

Mehr von SIKM (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Knowledge Retention Framework and Maturity Model