Class on 1/29

I found the discussion of knowledge management in Thursday's class very interesting.  Certainly, reducing redundancy in an organization with technologies that facilitate improved institutional knowledge management has many advantages.  Advantage include efficiencies which allow members of an organization to accomplish more and to spend time in more productive ways.  While this, in turn, potentially drives improved profitability, it can inadvertently stifle innovation.  

For example, when working in architecture I met with a commercially successful firm that deploys design strategies that maximize efficiency, thus maximizing margins on the firm's professional services.  This is accomplished through building a digital library of "standard" designs and detail.  This library is then used by architects when working on new projects.  Rather than developing a new design detail for a residential stair, for example, the designer selects a stair in the firm's library and inputs this design into the plans for a new house.  There are incredible efficiencies in this approach - time saved developing and drawing a new stair as well as the firm's knowledge and experience in building something they have built before.  As such, the designer and firm know what is required to execute construction of this design and can predict the costs of building this component.  

This approach, however, lacks innovation.  It does not allow for the development of new solutions, use of new materials or new approaches to building.  If designers simply rely on their firms' knowledge management systems when executing new products, the opportunity to generate alternative, more cost effective or more valuable solutions is limited.  I feel this is therefore important that firms acknowledge the potential trade-offs when developing and adopting knowledge management systems.