There has been much discussion in class (and always in practice) about measurement.  Practitioners like myself are always faced with the task of justify an endeavor.  It is interesting because it is not only at the funding stages, but all along the way.  After surveying the landscape thoroughly, I came to the conclusion that most ROI calculations on KM is at best an approximation, and at worst wishful thinking.  It is important to frame the Knowledge Management program narrowly enough to fulfill on objectives, but measuring these objectives is often futile.

I recently came across the work of Karen Stephenson, and my thoughts about measurement have changed.  Karen is internationally recognized in network theory, and she is president and founder of Netform International.  Karen is a trained mathematician and anthropologist.  She discovered that by analyzing dead civilizations, which she describes as networks, she was able to apply her findings to corporate settings.  Corporations, like ancient civilizations, are nothing more than networks of people.  Inside the network exists patterns that predict success or failure of a organization by the way information flows through the network.  She goes on to describe the difference between a hierarchy and a bureaucracy, and the role within the networks of key stakeholders.

What is truly fascinating about her work to me is that she asserts you can actually measure these networks.  Her company, Netform International, does exactly this.  She goes into companies and determines the value of their networks.  She helps companies determine key personnel.  Having read the work of Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone) and Wayne Baker, Stephenson takes the idea of social capital to a much richer context.

I must admit part of me remains skeptical as I think about presenting the value of a my company’s network at the next executive committee,  Nevertheless, it cannot be any worse than the crude ROI numbers I calculate now.