Publication Date

12-2008

Abstract

{Excerpt} What can be measured is not necessarily important and what is important cannot always be measured. When prioritizing investments in knowledge management, common traps lie waiting. They are delaying rewards for quick wins, using too many metrics, implementing metrics that are hard to control, and focusing on metrics that tear people away from business goals.

How can investments in knowledge management be picked? This is no easy matter. What can be measured is not necessarily important and what is important cannot always be measured. Not surprisingly, despite the wide implementation of knowledge management initiatives, a systematic and comprehensive assessment tool to prioritize investments in knowledge management in terms of return on investment is not available. This owes to the difficulty of demonstrating direct linkages between investments in knowledge management and organizational performance, most of which can only be inferred, and the fact that the miscellany of possible knowledge management initiatives calls for both quantitative and qualitative approaches. This is indeed the rationale behind the Balanced Scorecard introduced by Robert Kaplan and David Norton in 1992, whose qualities make it quite useful as a knowledge management metric.

Comments

Suggested Citation

Serrat, O. (2010). Picking investments in knowledge management. Washington, DC: Asian Development Bank.

Required Publisher's Statement

This article was first published by the Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org)

Share

COinS