Guy St. Clair Consulting Specialist, Knowledge Management and Learning

1. Collaboration and Knowledge SharingFor National SecurityDeveloping the Framework:The Knowledge Services Solution Guy St. Clair Consulting Specialist, Knowledge Management and Learning SMR International New York NY USA GuyStClair@cs.com

2. Objectives: • Examine industry and government efforts in knowledge development/knowledge sharing (KD/KS) • Look at critical infrastructure protection (CIP) and the integrated digital environment (IDE) as models • Identify requirements for KD/KS Goal: • Demonstrate that the convergence of information management, knowledge management, and strategic learning (knowledge services) provides a realistic gateway for KD/KS SMR International New York NY USA

3. Background • CIP • President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, Critical Foundations: Protecting America’s Infrastructures, October 1997 • Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD 63) • Cooperative efforts, both private and public and in partnership, are in place • Integrated Digital Environment • Enterprise-wide move to knowledge-centric environment • Transformation of the work culture • Commitment to work in accordance with new norms SMR International New York NY USA

4. Assumptions • Knowledge sharing is commonly desired among stakeholders • KD/KS will make a difference and is critical to national and economic security • Legal issues will be resolved • Technology for enabling KD/KS exists • Policy, procedure, and infrastructure/structure issues present the greatest challenges to establishing a sustainable knowledge-sharing culture • Private-public partnerships are essential to meet challenges posed by new technologies and non-traditional threats • 20th-century government command-control policy frameworks and attitudes toward industry cooperation need to be adapted and modified to facilitate this partnership • Both the public and private sectors have to walk a fine line in balancing security, commercial, and public interests SMR International New York NY USA

5. Overall Framework • Develop glossary of terms • Identify common set of information/knowledge to be developed and shared, utilizing glossary of terms being developed • Establish informal exchanges • Identify commercial and agency efforts • Identify/connect with appropriate agency notification efforts • Develop an information/knowledge exchange plan for shared processes • Work with pre-existing organizations to collect and alert organizational representatives • Formalize process using agreed-upon reporting guidelines with agreed-upon format SMR International New York NY USA

6. Why Share Information and Knowledge? • To comply with any existing information/knowledge sharing requirements • To ensure protection of critical information • To support high quality analysis • To provide near real-time collaboration and the exchange of pertinent information and knowledge among participants • To establish rational analysis of activities reported in a consistent manner, through the use of a standard reporting process • To “level the playing field,” so that all participants are describing the same types of activity, using the same language SMR International New York NY USA

7. Additional Benefits • To provide situation management expertise and advice, through the identification and distribution of benchmarking and due diligence efforts • To identify and disseminate knowledge about best practices • To provide for the development of a growing body of knowledge about agreed-upon subjects • To encourage commitment (and the eventual participation of other stakeholders), through the broadcasting of information and knowledge among participants • To build e-trust and bring a KD/KS culture into the stakeholder community; to establish within the stakeholder community that KS/KS is everyone’s problem and benefits all stakeholders SMR International New York NY USA

8. Why Knowledge Services? • Knowledge Services Defined: The Convergence of • Information management • Knowledge management • Strategic (performance-centered) learning • Organizational Culture Change • KD/KS builds on the assumption that all stakeholders accept their leadership responsibility to develop, to learn, and to teach, and to share tacit, explicit, and cultural knowledge within the enterprise • Founded on Collaboration/Learning/Teaching SMR International New York NY USA

9. Knowledge Services • Information Management • the organizational methodology that is concerned with the acquisition, arrangement, storage, retrieval, and use of information to product knowledge • Knowledge Management • the management practice that is used to help an enterprise manage explicit, tacit, and cultural information in order to reuse the information and, when appropriate, to create new knowledge • Strategic (Performance-Centered) Learning • the successful achievement of skills, competencies, knowledge, behaviors, and/or other outcomes required for excellence in workplace performance SMR International New York NY USA

10. Knowledge Services • Collaboration • “Collaboration is the premier candidate to replace hierarchy as the organizing principle for leading and managing in the 21st century workplace.” -Edward M. Marshall • The Learning Organization • systems thinking/personal mastery/mental models/shared visions/team learning -Peter Senge • The Teaching Organization • Everyone continually acquires new skills; everyone passes learning on to others -Noel M. Tichy & Eli Cohen SMR International New York NY USA

11. General Findings • KD/KS is tremendously important; still must achieve a critical mass of clarity: “No one has the strategic vision yet.” • Most stakeholders share philosophical commitment; must yet get to the notion of the private/public partnership (but recognizing that much of the infrastructure that enables KD/KS is private-sector based). • Both public and private sectors must do a good job of KD/KS; critical for creating new processes and making the ones we have work better • National effort should lead to global effort, since most of the major players in the effort are global organizations. • Trust is critical; assurance that knowledge developed and shared will not be distributed inappropriately is a key concern among all stakeholders SMR International New York NY USA

12. General Findings (2) • Prior to 9/11, not much was being shared because • no one had developed the “habit” of sharing • no notion of a nation at risk (the “burning fire” wasn’t there) • minor incidents were happening but not necessarily being reported • “we’re not sharing a lot because we don’t have anything to share” • Different mood after 9/11: desire to share, and most stakeholders are seeking a framework or process SMR International New York NY USA

13. General Findings (3) • KD/KS must be looked at in totality; a holistic approach to establishing knowledge development and knowledge sharing processes is required • Stakeholder communities seem to require a “standard of effort,” or rules of behavior, to ensure that methods, laws, expectations, etc. are coordinated • Some sort of enforcement mechanism is needed, to ensure that knowledge is shared, once an agreement to share has been established • Considerable interest in Y2K model—can that be replicated for current information sharing effort? SMR International New York NY USA

14. General Findings (4) • Span of control: is there a single leader/authority who can provide an “official” response or answer when one is required? • Similarly, is there a single facilitator or coordinator who can bring diverse players to the table? • KD/KS Awareness, Training, and Education: specific control objectives must be developed and implemented • Commitment: must “raise the bar” and organizations (both public and private) must develop management plans for encouraging good KD/KS practices SMR International New York NY USA

15. General Findings (5) • Arrangements can be informal or formal, but the consensus is that a formal arrangement will work better • Commercial firms have established a viable framework which government and corporate organizations are utilizing, to some extent • Assume technical staff and knowledge professionals will build the effort, but management must drive it (CIO/CKO/CLO overviews essential, but “Get rid of the generals” — have the work done by technical staff and knowledge workers who understand the need) SMR International New York NY USA

16. Next Steps • Identify partnering opportunities with organizations (both public and private) currently implementing KD/KS programs • Develop recommendations for technical architecture and data schemas to resolve interoperability issues, where necessary • Determine recommendations for incorporating strategic (performance-centered) learning for technical training and, especially, for resolving cultural issues • Determine data transfer requirements • Publish reporting formats and test data transfer • Formalize procedures SMR International New York NY USA

17. Future Issues • Resource development and the allocation of responsibility for supporting an established KD/KS program (particularly in the early stages of development) • Establishment of U.S. public policy for voluntary cross-sector KD/KS • Development of enforcement standards • Identifying state and international legal and public policy issues, to ensure cooperation and enforcement • Development and implementation of a formally structured information clearinghouse SMR International New York NY USA

18. Guy St. Clair SMR International 527 Third Avenue # 105 New York NY 10016 USA Tel: 212 683 6285 Fax: 212 683 2987 GuyStClair@cs.com Contact Information SMR International New York NY USA