<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why do we need KM anyway?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cognitivepotential.com/2008/09/why-the-frak-do-we-need-km-anyway/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cognitivepotential.com/2008/09/why-the-frak-do-we-need-km-anyway/</link>
	<description>Taking time to consume, create, share.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 00:27:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dale Arseneault</title>
		<link>http://www.cognitivepotential.com/2008/09/why-the-frak-do-we-need-km-anyway/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Dale Arseneault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:44:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cognitivepotential.com/?p=157#comment-24</guid>
		<description>What Steve suggests is a great idea, something that very few organizations seem to do, and a great start to a re-usable tool.  But hopefully launching into discussions about &quot;job descriptions,&quot; &quot;competency models,&quot; &quot;skills&quot; may point to the need for more. What I&#039;m talking about is two things: 1) the unique nature of the application of generic skills and qualifications (expressed in competency models, skills inventories, job descriptions etc.) in the work environment and the lessons learned from that, and b) the development of &quot;expertise&quot; in the context of a work environment that enables people to successfully improvise when faced with a unique, complex challenge or situation. To try and &quot;transfer&quot; the unique learning that comes from experience gained in an organization requires a lot more than an MS Word document or a spread sheet. Organizations would do well to recognize and distinguish a &quot;replacement strategy&quot; of filling generic skill and qualification gaps, and fostering true-cross generational learning through far richer developmental conversations in the organization&#039;s context while engaging in productive work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What Steve suggests is a great idea, something that very few organizations seem to do, and a great start to a re-usable tool.  But hopefully launching into discussions about &#8220;job descriptions,&#8221; &#8220;competency models,&#8221; &#8220;skills&#8221; may point to the need for more. What I&#8217;m talking about is two things: 1) the unique nature of the application of generic skills and qualifications (expressed in competency models, skills inventories, job descriptions etc.) in the work environment and the lessons learned from that, and b) the development of &#8220;expertise&#8221; in the context of a work environment that enables people to successfully improvise when faced with a unique, complex challenge or situation. To try and &#8220;transfer&#8221; the unique learning that comes from experience gained in an organization requires a lot more than an MS Word document or a spread sheet. Organizations would do well to recognize and distinguish a &#8220;replacement strategy&#8221; of filling generic skill and qualification gaps, and fostering true-cross generational learning through far richer developmental conversations in the organization&#8217;s context while engaging in productive work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
