Looking for a few good anarchists
The Internet has erupted, spewing more and more information every day. Some people not only cope with it, they thrive on it. Enter the ideal personality type for the 21st century--the anarchist.
Successful organizations have always aspired to improve efficiencies, accomplish more and move faster than ever before. And with the explosion of the Web, information technology is propelling organizations at breakneck speeds. Most of the organizations we work with find themselves in a mad scramble to stay ahead of the competition.
In those environments, there never seems to be enough time for more systematic yet necessary activities such as effective business planning, marketing, recruitment or employee training. That is even more obvious in small to mid-sized businesses in rapid growth mode. Such companies are roaring down the highway through an ever-increasing glut of information and other distractions.
Few people have the luxury to cruise methodically instead of hurrying. Granted, some upper managers and top-level executives might be disciplined enough to move more meticulously, which invariably helps them see the bigger picture and puts them in a better position to guide the corporate vision. But more often, the day-to-day pace and mayhem leave most employees with little room to ponder anything more than the urgency of the task at hand.
Many organizations look to technology as a means to harness information and help employees deliver on the corporate vision. However, technology that aggregates and delivers information is not enough. Success also depends on effectively leveraging the common corporate environment--chaos--and making it conducive to creativity.
Are we living in chaos? Absolutely. It's a chaos created by the information pinch and by living in dog years and Internet years instead of person years. So what individuals are in the best position to thrive in today's chaotic work environment? Anarchists.
Whether they admit it or not, companies actively seek and reward people who can learn quickly, do it on their own and don't need a lot of help or support from others. We use euphemisms like self-starter and entrepreneurial spirit to describe their maverick qualities. Such people can effectively apply their experiences and lessons learned to an environment largely bereft of rules and cookie-cutter procedures.
Anarchists with talent seem to get things done in the face of chaos, and are most comfortable when there are few rules to follow, little structure and considerable freedom. As the information crush and speed of change continue to fuel chaos, anarchists thrive. Chaos provides them with the gateway to success.
In terms of actually getting work done, anarchists succeed because they can find solutions to unconventional problems. That is much different than solving conventional problems, which can be accomplished by applying conventional knowledge. For example, the conventional problem of assembly line efficiency can be solved by applying the conventional knowledge of identifying bottlenecks and streamlining processes. The requirements of such processes are well-defined and linear, and the results are quantifiable.
Unconventional problems, on the other hand, cannot be solved with conventional thinking or simplistic knowledge. With unconventional problems, only a portion of the problem might be understood, and people might have no previous knowledge about how to solve the problem. For example, you might know what needs to be done, but have no idea how it should be done. That is typical of problems stemming from unstructured processes that involve key individuals performing various interrelated tasks that require creativity.
Chaos arguably fosters creativity. Think of the best songwriters, artists or software programmers you know. Their best work often comes out of chaos and unstructured environments, and they excel by applying unconventional thinking to their situations and pushing themselves beyond their comfort zones. Paul McCartney and John Lennon didn't become one of the best rock music songwriting teams by limiting their writing to the conventions of marketable pop songs aimed only at teenagers. Bill Gates didn't become the richest man in the world by limiting Microsoft's domain to operating systems.
Organizations must recognize that some business functions require employees to solve unconventional problems, which might be better served in an unstructured environment. Trying to eliminate chaos altogether by applying rigid structures will only frustrate the creative process and exacerbate the problem--just as forcing the Beatles into a process to crank out bubblegum pop hits would have prevented them from ever creating Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. The key is to implement the minimum level of structure needed to eliminate bad decisions, while maintaining enough chaos to allow free thinking and creativity--innovation that the organization can leverage.
:Once we understand today's chaotic work environments and the importance of unconventional thinking, it becomes clear that the definition of knowledge management should encompass more than packaging and delivering filtered information from the Web and corporate repositories. Any definition of KM must incorporate creativity, and a good KM strategy should encompass an environment that is conducive to creativity and resources that will accelerate the creative process.
In fact, knowledge management is an inaccurate term, because it implies that some workers use "knowledge" to perform their job tasks but others don't. The fact is, everybody uses knowledge to some degree, even if they never come close to using technology. What distinguishes knowledge management is not the information or knowledge that is being managed, but creativity.
:Organizations expect all of their workers to be productive, and creativity is one of the unique ways that workers can make themselves more productive. KM strategies that focus on productivity should include provisions to give employees a work environment that helps foster creativity. In fact, KM initiatives that focus solely on pushing more and more knowledge at workers may actually be counterproductive, because information overload can stifle creativity.
Back in the 1930s, a team of industrial psychologists began manipulating the work environment of one of the largest and most efficient factories in the world--the Western Electric Hawthorne Plant in Cicero, IL. Those tests, known as the Hawthorne Studies, proved that making subtle aesthetic changes to the plant floor (using softer light bulbs, changing the color of the walls, etc.) increased worker productivity significantly.
We agree that technology is critical to knowledge management practices, but other environmental factors may be equally important. We see plenty of organizations that recognize the importance of environment on productivity. For example, one approach is to focus on getting away from private and isolated offices, with people working instead in cubicles set in open spaces. The intent is to encourage worker collaboration, knowledge sharing and creativity.
:While the intent may be sound, organizations must recognize when a given environment is not working. For example, the open work environment concept might actually create negative chaos and inefficiencies. Such an environment might result in so many interruptions that creativity is stifled. The implicit message in such an environment is, "Hey, c'mon up and talk to me. You can bother me at any time--my work isn't that important, so I can stop working to interact with you."
While some anarchists may succeed in this type of environment, others may not. Organizations can increase the likelihood of employee creativity by determining which work environments work best for different employees. Those people who find inspiration through others could be best suited for highly collaborative environments. Those who find inspiration from intense concentration will fare better in more isolated environments or occasional telecommuting scenarios where collaboration is more subtle and less frequent.
That is where technology comes in. Technology needs to support interaction among teams that may or may not ever meet in the same location. That has as much to do with collaboration as it does with information sharing and distribution. The key is to make employees as productive as possible and to support their creativity.
For information technology vendors, that is where the action is. In fact, much of the required technology already exists. Some vendors aren't doing a great job of promoting the merits of their products. Instead, they make flamboyant claims about managing "implicit" and "tacit" knowledge, as if they have solved the riddle of human unconsciousness. Would-be buyers look on with intrigue and bewilderment, wondering how such rhetoric applies to their business environments.
For now, we'll need to continue to provide the anarchists in our organizations with the environmental freedoms they need to do their jobs. When we figure out how to implement the right technologies to support the most productive work environments we can devise, we'll be that much closer to true knowledge management.
John Balla (312-433-7793) is a senior analyst with Doculabs.