Knowledge sharing to learn as well as to perform #mslocjam

Key #mslocjam questions concerning knowledge sharing for learning include:

We can see value from knowledge sharing (using social technology) to address specific, performance challenge – leveraging the network to get an answer to a question, for example. But how do we also make sure we leverage the same technology for deeper learning? What practices or tactics have emerged as useful in this case?

For these topics we are interested in hearing about effective practices or innovative new approaches. We are particularly interested in your more reflective thinking — based on your own experiences in working to help organizations become more connected and open in their knowledge sharing, what insights do you draw?

Share your insights as a comment or point us to other resources.

7 Comments

  1. My instinct is that getting people to engage in deeper learning is all about asking the right questions. Within our own Jive, some threads take off while others sit with only a few comments. While some of the superstar threads are self-fulfilling as activity drives more activity, I bet they were hot topics to begin with – things that were topical, pithy, or passion-invoking. Perhaps controversial? I wonder how community managers can help those threads flourish, especially in organizations where people don’t want to say anything controversial that their colleagues or boss will see.

    Like

  2. Last night the #msloc430 class had the pleasure of hosting Harold Jarche http://www.jarche.com/ (@hjarche on Twitter) for an hour-long chat about the networked workplace and personal knowledge management (PKM). My interpretation is that much of the discussion centered around this issue of seeing knowledge sharing as central to professional and personal learning and development. That seems odd to write on the one hand — isn’t that a blinding glimpse of the obvious? — but I do suspect that some of the language we use to justify knowledge-sharing investments is more focused on speed, and finding know-what and know-how more quickly. Do we shortchange the recognition that we are at the same time creating an incredible environment for continuous learning?

    See the Storify of our session to catch some of the dialogue with Harold.
    http://storify.com/jeffmerrell/harold-jarche

    Like

  3. To your question, Jeff: Yes. There is so much value in fostering a continuous learning environment (conditions for innovation) but biz seems myopic about this, which would seem to suggest that many will fail to keep up with change. I saw a bizarre article recently that appeared to state that L&D’s role is in influencing behaviour change only and that corporate training is too academic. I have no words for that because a) humans are much more complex than that and perform best when not treated that way, and b) I’ve never found corporate training to be academic in any way (and we should be both avoiding corporate training regardless, since most of our learning happens outside of the formal learning environment). /end rant

    Like

    1. As always, Alison, an insightful point. Myopia or selective attention (we don’t see the gorilla http://chronicle.com/article/Collaborative-Learning-for-the/128789/). If we keep thinking about L&D as only “influencing behavior” we miss the gorilla walking into the scene and telling us it’s about people connecting with people and learning in more self-directed ways.

      I am curious to see if some of the work we’ve watched with regard to cMOOCs will begin to change that. Not from the inside necessarily (i.e., L&D becomes less myopic) but from the outside; self-directed, personally controlled learning finally sucks the air out of the 70-year-old “training”/behaviorist balloon.

      Like

  4. That’s a good q. I think the more work done to foster individual agency could end up changing the game significantly. That’s my perfect world scenario, anyway. 🙂

    Like

Comments are closed.