I have been spending a lot of time lately thinking about how to best build and grow knowledge communities within quality. One of my objectives at WCQI this year was to get more involved in the divisions and technical forums and I, frankly, might have been overly successful in volunteering for the Team and Workplace Excellence Forum (TWEF) – more on that later when announcements have been made.
Stan Garfield provides 10 principles for successful Knowledge Management Communities. If you are interested in the topic of knowledge management, Stan is a great thinker and resource.
|Principle||Thoughts for ASQ Divisions/Technical Forums|
|Communities should be independent of organizational structure; they are built around areas upon which members wish to interact.||The divisions and technical forums are one part of the organizational structure of the ASQ, but they tend to be more on the knowledge generating side of things. The other major membership unit, sections, are geographical.|
Divisions and forums are basically broken in two categories: industry type(s) and activity band.
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic or Biomedical are great examples of industry focused (these are by nature of my work the only two I’ve paid attention to), and they seem to be very focused on product integrity questions.
The activity bands are all over the place. For example in the People and Service technical committee there is a Quality Management, Human Development and Leadership and a Team Excellence Forum. Those three have serious overlap.
It is of interest to me that the other divisions in the People and Service technical committee are Education, Healthcare, Government, Customer Supplier and Service Quality, which are much more industry focused.
And then there is the Social Responsibility division. I have super respect for those people, because they are basically trying to reinvent the definition of quality in a way that can be seen as anathema to the traditional product integrity focused viewpoint.
There is still so much to figure out about the TCCs.
|Communities are different from teams; they are based on topics, not on assignments.||Easy enough in the ASQ as this is a volunteer organization.|
|Communities are not sites, team spaces, blogs or wikis; they are groups of people who choose to interact.||As the ASQ tries to develop my.ASQ to something folks are actually using, this is a critical principle. The site pages will grow and be used because people are interacting, not drive interaction.|
Ravelry seems like a great example on how to do this right. Anyone know of any white papers on Ravelry?
|Community leadership and membership should be voluntary; you can suggest that people join, but should not force them to.||Divisions are voluntary to join, and people get involved if they chose to. |
|Communities should span boundaries; they should cross functions, organizations, and geographic locations.||The ASQ has this mostly right. |
The industry focused communities are made up of members across companies, with a wide spread of locations.
|Minimize redundancy in communities; before creating a new one, check if an existing community already addresses the topic.||The ASQ hasn’t done a great job of this. One of my major thoughts is that the Quality Management Division has traditionally claimed ownership of the CMQ/OE body of knowledge, but frankly a good chunk of it should be between the Team Excellence and Human Development divisions, which between them seem to have a fair bit of overlap. |
Take change management, or project management, or program management. Which one of the three divisions should be focusing on that? All three? Seems a waste of effort. It’s even worse that I know the Lean Division spends a fair amount talking about this.
|Communities need critical mass; take steps to build membership.||The major dilemma for professional associations. Love to see your suggestions in the comments.|
|Communities should start with as broad a scope as is reasonable; separate communities can be spun off if warranted.||I’m going to say a radical and unpopular thought. If the ASQ was serious about transformation it would have dissolved half of the divisions and then rebuilt them from scratch. Too many are relics of the past and are not relevant in their current construction. Do you truly need a Lean and a Six Sigma forum? A Team Excellence and a Human development (and a quality management).Should biomedical (medical devices) be part of the FDC?|
|Communities need to be actively nurtured; community leaders need to create, build, and sustain communities.||To do this community leaders need training, coaching and mentoring. I’m happy with the connections I’ve started building in headquarters and with a certain board member.|
Perhaps one of the focuses of the Team and Workplace Excellence Forum should be to help push the praxis on this.
| Communities can be created, led, and supported using TARGETs:|
Types (TRAIL — Topic, Role, Audience, Industry, Location)
Activities (SPACE — Subscribe, Post, Attend, Contribute, Engage)
Requirements (SMILE — Subject, Members, Interaction, Leaders, Enthusiasm)
Goals (PATCH — Participation, Anecdotes, Tools, Coverage, Health)
Expectations (SHAPE — Schedule, Host, Answer, Post, Expand)
Tools (SCENT — Site, Calendar, Events, News, Threads).
|Okay. So much here. But this helps me build an agenda for a forthcoming meeting. |
I may be jumping the gun, but if you are a member of the ASQ and interested in contributing to the Team and Excellence Forum, contact me.
2 thoughts on “ASQ Technical Forums and Divisions as Knowledge Communities”