Was provided with a good example of what I would describe as 'localism' knowledge sharing yesterday.

I'm sure I read once that knowledge (or was it communications) can be treated like a monarchy (one rule, top down); communism (everyone told everything) and I also think they mentioned socialism and various other 'ism's. I am a great believer that knowledge sharing, learning, communicating etc needs to be pitched between the 'personal' and 'local' level to be truly sought, discovered, understood and re-used.

The approach I've taken is to move away from large KM repositories or formal structures. Within the environment I work, knowledge is best-placed to be flexible, fluid, local, personal and based around a define community, with visible and active leadership. Anyway, back to the example.

One of our most active communities have regular 'Cappuccino' meetings. These bring together group spokespersons of the community to share and take back key points. The subject matter is primarily technical, at a fairly high level, rather than deep or detailed. The key is to capture sufficient information on key issues in the group, to bring them to the table, and take back the points which are relevant in the local market place.

A local group head had previously challenged Cappuccino Reps to consider the best ways of facilitating knowledge sharing locally and this meeting included a discussion on progress to date.

One group has recently introduced a new series of knowledge sharing meetings and, following the Cappuccino theme, have named them Macchiato meetings! Formal minutes are being taken and circulatedon the communities intranet area. A number of other offices also have technical meetings, sometimes on an ad hoc basis, and others have knowledge/technical slots within general partner/manager meetings. The community leader acknowledged that a little discipline, in terms of regularity, note taking & follow through will make for better knowledge sharing generally, and he encouraged all offices to take steps in this direction.

These very basic physical, personal and local steps has seen increased activity, in terms of chatter, sharing and collaboration. It didn't need a formal central KM department or a matrix of workflow. Just a good community structure, a sense of local engagement and personal responsibility. Community and personal engagement equates to 'localism'

One of our knowledge stakeholders recently asked if we have a 'workflow' process document which is used across the intranet. The fact is we don't - and deliberately so. Let me explain.

Content comes in different shapes and context. Some needs 'locking-down', other content is 'open', while elements develop as it is pushed, modified and enhanced. There is not a 'one solution' fits all process flow within each stream, nor within each site area within a community site. Some communities have areas which are controlled by a central team, and no-one else can update/add. They also have areas which are open and require no authorisation or approval to publish and enhance. Other communities are more centrally controlled with some locked-down areas.

What we do provide is a 'governance structure'. Generally speaking teh governance structure provides visible ownwership for each area of a site. The owner is best placed to determine the requirements of content production for their area - from the user, risk and stream perspective. When we sit down with each 'owner' we then structure the content flow process and build as required. An overall 'steering group' would ideally determine the overall suitability of the workflow, however, experience suggests this is more a rubber stamping process.

Currently many sites are built around a traditional knowledge management approach - the sites are merely manipulation of information already created. This type of governance structure us suitable for this. When/if we look to introduce more 'knowledge transfer/sharing' elements it may be of value to look at adding various processes for each area.

The key thing in all of this, for me, is that whether we talk of process workflow, knowledge sharing, transfer, or management, it only has value if it can result in action: new knowledge generation; new ideas; thoughts. But I think that action is more likely if we are open-minded about where and how it may arise. This may not be an appropriate for some communities that require lock-down on many areas of content, yet maybe something that will develop once the site is launched, adopted and trust develops. But I think that action is more likely if we are open-minded about where it might arise. If we try and predict where it may be, and from which interactions it might come, I think it is most probable that no useful action and value will result in the long term.

Acquiring knowldge has no value - it's what you do with it that provide the value.

Cancellation of meetings is becoming an increasing trend. Good for the firm, in terms of chargeable staff spending time with clients and not us, but it makes us need to think of fresh ideas of how to get time with chargeable staff, making it beneficial for them and the knowledge communities they represent. Our approach has always been to ensure these communities are led by people with experience of client needs/requirements, ensuring their knowledge communities are relevant and valuable to the stream. The mix of face-to-face, webinars, VCN and phone calls has proved a popular mix and from Monday we are offering our stakeholders Yammer to allow increased engagement and collaboration with us.

Some years back domain management occupied much of my time, protecting one of our most important IP assets, our domain. I used to receive many flyers, emails and even cold calls on how/why I needed to register something urgently, or Russian spy's were looking to buy-up a potential unprotected domain (I hope this doesn't give the impression I was working during the cold war).

Anyway I've become weary of all the demands for land grabs and gold rushes for domains. However, something which is catching my eye is the potential that Twitter may start a gold rush for currently locked-up usernames.

Although Twitter didn’t specify a date, a spokesperson said they are planning to release usernames that are either inactive or have been deleted by their former "owners."

Soon we could see a virtual stampede as companies and individuals clamour for coveted Twitter names and themes.

The Prime Minister's announcement of a free laptop and broadband connection for more than a quarter of a million families is a welcome step towards bridging the digital divide.

Inside the firewall we rarely talk about the digital divide (more and more services moving online but employees are still disadvantaged but their lack of knowledge with the browser and the workplace web). In my conversation with employees I am still amazed how many people have no, or poor, connectivity with the workplace web. Whether it be the lack of signals, poor speed or dated technology, I continue to hear of employees struggling with online services.

I believe in my job I sometimes forget not everyone has a deep relationship with the web. The cure? Certainly more time and resource given to training users to understand and engage with websites, plus easier interfaces (that's why Yammer is so easy to adopt) and raising the level of technology we use (I get far quicker connection when logging in from home than I do in any office). But all this costs. While we are quick to move services online we are slow to teach, hand-hold and adopt these services with the user.

Since the New year I have seen a growth in requests for 'social media' areas within our intranet (or 'business influence' areas as I would I would prefer to call them). The reason for this? I doubt its people who have suddenly read about social media and want to get on the bandwagon. Most of the requests come from groups who we have engaged with over their knowledge sharing and collaboration strategy. Once we get the high-level commitment to share and collaborate, the next steps is to identified the issue, or gap. In many cases this is a lack of leadership, in terms of knowledge sharing. What better way to provide leadership than to practice what you preach. Hence we start to see some of our business leaders eager to get something started. This is when the 'business influence' tools can then be introduced, with some 'already prepared' protocols, blogging guidelines, and 'participation' document. Within the next few weeks we hope to see one of our largest community leaders beginning a blog, a group on Yammer for over 100 Managers, and a sub-group leader blogging. Maybe 2010 will be a good year for knowledge sharing?