Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Monitoring And Evaluation Of Knowledge Management Elb

Presentation from the IKM-Emergent group presenting work on M&E of knowledge management. Presentation given during the KMIC webinar organised by USAID.

  • Login to see the comments

Monitoring And Evaluation Of Knowledge Management Elb

  1. 1. Monitoring and Evaluation of Knowledge Management Simon Hearn, ODI, [email_address] Ewen LeBorgne, IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, [email_address] Valerie Brown, Australia National University, [email_address]
  2. 2. Overview
  3. 3. <ul><li>“ It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry.” </li></ul><ul><li>- Albert Einstein </li></ul>
  4. 4. Definitions “ When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less”
  5. 5. Monitoring and evaluation <ul><li>OECD definitions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Evaluation : The systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Monitoring : A continuing function that uses systematic collection of data on specified indicators to provide indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives (abridged) </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Monitoring and evaluation <ul><li>OK, but... Any definition must recognise: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>M&E as universal functions, not specialised roles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Presence of different worldviews </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Validity of evidence from different knowledge domains* </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The ethical basis for the desired social change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The importance of the unexpected and the intangible </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Knowledge <ul><li>Objective and subjective </li></ul><ul><li>Individual and society </li></ul><ul><li>Facts and values </li></ul><ul><li>Tacit and implcit </li></ul><ul><li>E.g. Western scientific conception of knowledge as ‘justified true belief’ vs African concept of Ubuntu </li></ul>
  8. 8. Development <ul><li>Often conceptualised as a service industry </li></ul><ul><li>Delivery of even basic services (roads, sanitation..) requires an understanding of the social, political and economic contexts </li></ul><ul><li>Thus, development is more like a knowledge industry (Powell 2006) </li></ul><ul><li>But development is more than donor aid and we must recognise civic-driven change also </li></ul>
  9. 9. Challenges
  10. 10. Challenges in M&E of KM4D <ul><li>KM4D does not as yet have a well grounded theory </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge for development practice is still young </li></ul><ul><li>KM4D goes beyond what is labeled ‘KM’ </li></ul><ul><li>Competing ontological and epistemological perspectives (and related knowledge systems) </li></ul><ul><li>Existing reporting frameworks are designed for a service industry rather than a knowledge industry </li></ul><ul><li>There can be no simple cause-effect relationship </li></ul><ul><li>KM initiatives often lack explicit linkages to individual, specialist, organisational or social results </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge is not static </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of methods for interpreting intangibles </li></ul>
  11. 11. Signposts
  12. 12. 1. KM ripple model Hulsebosch et al (2009) Performance improvement Changed practices Knowledge capital Knowledge process-enhancing activities
  13. 13. 2. The KM Framework Talisayon (2009)
  14. 14. Need a better understanding of what intangibles are Based on Talisayon (2009) Value creation through intangibles Human Capital Structural Capital Relationship Capital Tangible Assets Motivational Factors Cognitive Factors
  15. 15. Need a better understanding of knowledge transitions Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) SECI
  16. 16. Need a better understanding of how knowledge is put to use Graham et al (2001) Knowledge to action cycle
  17. 17. Need a better understanding of organisational factors affecting knowledge use Ramalingam (2005) The RAPID Framework for Knowledge Strategies
  18. 18. We need to understand the level of complexity Snowden (2002) Cynefin framework
  19. 19. Summary: a range of perspectives <ul><li>Ontological: What world-views are reflected in the initiative and how do we recognise them? </li></ul><ul><li>Epistemological: What are the knowledge domains contributing to M&E and how do they relate? </li></ul><ul><li>Socio-political: Who has a stake in the monitoring process and who has power? How can we monitor these interdependent relationships? </li></ul><ul><li>Methodological: How to choose tools and approaches relevant to the parties and processes involved? </li></ul><ul><li>Operational: How do we organise M&E activities according to each of the knowledge domains? </li></ul>
  20. 20. Your reflections? <ul><li>Do you identify with these signposts? </li></ul><ul><li>What signposts do you use? </li></ul><ul><li>How do you see these models supporting your work? </li></ul>
  21. 21. Multiple knowledges: M&E as multiple partners
  22. 22. Whole-of-community M&E <ul><ul><li>HOLISTIC SOLUTIONS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SPECIALISED ADVICE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ORGANISATIONAL SUPPORT </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>COMMUNITY INTERESTS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Multiple knowledges (Brown 2008) <ul><ul><li>HOLISTIC KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Focus, vision . <ul><ul><li>SPECIALISED KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Environment, Health, Finance… , <ul><ul><li>STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Organisational structure, aims <ul><ul><li>LOCAL KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Shared community event <ul><ul><li>INDIVIDUAL KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Personal lived experience
  24. 24. Rejected knowledges <ul><ul><li>HOLISTIC KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Airy-fairy . <ul><ul><li>SPECIALISED KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Jargon <ul><ul><li>STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Self-serving <ul><ul><li>LOCAL KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Anecdote <ul><ul><li>INDIVIDUAL KNOWLEDGE </li></ul></ul>Biased
  25. 25. Local knowledge Holistic knowledge Individual knowledge Collective knowledge as a nested set A collaborative system Specialist knowledge Organisational knowledge
  26. 26. Port Pirie: small town with the biggest lead smelter in the world COMMUNITY SPECIALIST ORGANISATION HOLISTIC FOCUS People long resigned to risk Health Centre stays aloof Mine muzzles council INDIVIDUAL Children diagnosed with lead KNOWLEDGES STRUCTURE CONDITIONS Fear for future livelihood
  27. 27. New alliances in Port Pirie COMMUNITY SPECIALISTS ORGANISATIONAL HOLISTIC Outrage, political action Technical skills, advocacy Public/private good Children’s well-being I NDIVIDUAL Parent, grandparent
  28. 28. <ul><li>M&E as collective learning </li></ul><ul><li>multiple interests </li></ul><ul><li>multiple knowledges </li></ul><ul><li>collaborative action </li></ul>
  29. 29. Next steps: - The IKM-E approach - Emergent questions on the horizon
  30. 30. Our approach: Multi-evidence based? <ul><li>Each knowledge community uses different M&E criteria, evidence bases, databases for judgments... </li></ul><ul><li>Individuals (experiences) </li></ul><ul><li>Communities (observations) </li></ul><ul><li>Experts (practitioner stories) </li></ul><ul><li>Organisations (monitoring reports as stated) </li></ul><ul><li>Holistic thinkers (ideas, forecasts) </li></ul>
  31. 31. Our approach: Purposes of conducting M&E <ul><li>Financial accountability </li></ul><ul><li>Operational improvement </li></ul><ul><li>Strategic readjustment </li></ul><ul><li>Capacity strengthening </li></ul><ul><li>Contextual understanding </li></ul><ul><li>Deepening understanding (research) </li></ul><ul><li>Self-auditing </li></ul><ul><li>Advocacy </li></ul><ul><li>Sensitisation </li></ul><ul><li>(From I. Guijt’s PhD thesis ‘seeking surprise’) </li></ul>
  32. 32. Our approach: KM as collective learning Describe Design Do Develop Initiative <ul><li>Key to nested knowledge cultures: </li></ul><ul><li>Individual </li></ul><ul><li>(Local) Community </li></ul><ul><li>Specialised </li></ul><ul><li>Organisational (strategic) </li></ul><ul><li>Holistic </li></ul>
  33. 33. Our approach: critical questioning <ul><li>A series of questions at each step of the way </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall, a sound questioning practice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>And specifically, a guideline to tailor one’s approach: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What questions to address? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Who to involve, in what function? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What tools and methods to choose? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What lessons to draw from the approach? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  34. 34. Emergent questions on the horizon <ul><li>How would our approach work in practice? </li></ul><ul><li>Specific methods and metrics to go ‘light’ </li></ul><ul><li>Particularly complexity-focused approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Power vs. collective? </li></ul>
  35. 35. What now?
  36. 36. IKM-E + KMIC = IKMEKMIC? <ul><li>Avoiding overlaps... </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Connecting KMIC and IKM (blogs...) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Organising another webinar? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identifying different models / approaches? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Having creative leaps... </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reviewing the IKM papers? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expanding parts of this paper? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Testing the IKM-E framework (later)? </li></ul></ul>
  37. 37. Additional resources <ul><li>IKM-Emergent website: </li></ul><ul><li>The giraffe , Working group 3 blog </li></ul><ul><li>Working paper 3: ‘Monitoring and Evaluation in Knowledge Management for Development‘ </li></ul><ul><li>Background paper: ‘Monitoring and evaluating knowledge management strategies’ </li></ul>
  38. 38. Thank you!