Opinion What Is a Chief Knowledge Officer? 29 Michael J. Earl • Ian A. Scott Many ambiguities characterize tbe new corporate role nfCKO and knowledge man- agement in general. Michael J. Earl is professor nl In many kiii^c (n;u:ini/Liii(nis, :inj sonic I. Knowletlge totla\ is a nece,ss;iry Ltntl mtormalion management and sniail ones, a new corporate exctuiiw i.s su.stainable source of c()ni|-}i.'titi\ e ad\an- difectDr of the Centre for IIK' chief kiiowlecl.^L' offkvr. tage. In an era charatteri/etl In rapid Research in Information cs arc crealing the po.sition to ini- change anti unceriainty. it i,s claiinetl that Management, London tiate. tlri\e, lintl coordinate knowietl^iiL' sLiccesski! conipanies are iliose ihat con- Business School. Ian A. Scot' inana,t^cmeiU [iro^yranis. We \\AW .stiitlieel sistently treate lU'w knowledge, tlissenii- is a visiting research fellow twenty cliiel knowletlge olTicers (CKOs) in nate it through llie organization, and at the Centre. \onh ,'\nierica antl [-Airope both to iindei- enibotly it in technologies, protkitis, and stand their roles and to t-ain in.-^iijht on seiAice.s.' Intleetf several sectors — for u\-ol\in,<i knowletlge nianageincni prattite. example, the linainial ser\ices. consult- ing, and sohware intkistries — (.k'|-)L'iKl on An acceptetl detinitit>n of knowledge knowletlge as their printipal way lo cre- management cioe.s not yet exist, akhough alf value, Tluis knowletlge is tiisjilacing perspectives on knnwIeLlge Lihountl, Most cajiiial. natural resources, antl lahor as the of ihe CKOs we .studietl ha\e liule time basit' economic resouitt-.- for sucli conceptiiaii/ation. hLii they agree on three [:)t)ints. 1. There is general recognition thai com- Slaan M Eail • Scot! Wmlei \ panies arc not gooti at managing knowletlge. Thev ing such iniiiati\es who v\ill feel ihal they aie. in may untiervalue the trcatit)n and capture of knowl- etfect. (,:K()S. However, they have different titles, edge, they may lose or give awa\' wliat they possess, such as tlircctor of Intellectual capital or vice presi- they may deter or inhiliit knowledge sharing, antl dent of organizational learning. tiiev' mav uiitlerinvest in Ixiih using antl reusing the knowledge they have. Above all. perhaps, they may The much ct)nimoner and well-established role t)f nol know what they know. This is probably true ol chief inft)rmati()n ofhccr. or CIO. although sometimes explicit or articulated knowledge: that which can be thought to be similar to that of CKO, is titiile differ- expressed in vvortls antl numbers antl can be easily t'nt. CIOs ha\e tlistinet responsibilities — !'!' strategy. comnuinitaied and shared in liard form, as scientific IT operations, and managing the IT tunction — antl 30 fonnuias. cotiified prt>cedures, or universal principles. so far have not formally taken on the lull range of It is untloubtetlly iruc of tLicii (M- Linarticulateel knowl- knov\letlge management acti\'ities, Where a CKO edge: that whith is more personal, experiential, ctm- exists, there is also likely to be a CIO, but the ctirol- text six'cific, anti iiarti to foiuiaiizc: is tiifficuit tt> lary is not true. communicate or share vvitii otiiers: and Is generaiiy in tiie iieatis of indivitUiais anti leams.' •fht)se "thief knovvietlge of fit ers" v\e siuelietl are senior corfiorate executix'es with knov\letige" in their 3. Recognizing liie potentiai oi' knowletlge in vaiue lilies. In other wt^rds. we could assume that they hatl creatitin antl tiie failure lo iuiiy expioit it, some cor- been a[)[")ointed specificallv' to orthestrate a knowl- poraiions iuive emiiarkcti on knowietigc management etlge management [")rogi"ani. They are all first incum- |->rt)graiiis, liiese are expiicil attempts to manage bents in tlie role, most having heen in office less knowictige as a resource, in parlicuiai:' than two years. We studietl them using semistruc- • Designing anti instaiiing techni(|ucs anti |")rocesses lured face-to-face interviews jilus a personality as.se.ss- to treale, proteti, antl use knt>wn knowictige, ment t|uestionnaiiv. Subsequently, we conducted two workshops with st>me of the panicipanis to compare • Designing and creating env irontiients anci activities our results with iheir ct>llecli\e experiences. to tiiscover and release knowletige tiiai is not known. • Articuiating liie purpose Lintl nature ot managing knovviedge as a resource antl embodying it in other Other than for reasons of curiosity, vvliy study chief initiatives antl programs. knt^wledge officers? Fight jiractical t|uestit)ns stand oul: These three attivities neetl not be solely, or even mainlv. iniraorganizational. To he sLU"e. there is usual- 1. What do CKOs do? (What activities and intencn- iv poieniiai for improving knovviedge capaiiiiitics. tions have tht'V' been engaged in so tar?) hoiii within and iictween units of an (^-ganization. 2. Is there a model CKO? (What ca)Xibilities and foni- hut cMcinai t)r interorganizationai jiossiiiilities may pclentie.s tio they iet|uiie?) iie at ieast as attrat tive anti ultimatei\- more imptir- 3. How tloes a CKO tliffer from a CIO? (Could one tani. Tiiesc include, for exampie, mutuai sharing of peison take on both roles?) knowletige witli partners, allies, intermetiiaries, sup- -i. Is ihere a typical CKO [irofile or jieisonLility? (It I. I'iiers. antl tustomers. [uiuaily. jirotctting externai as a CHO. vvanletl to aj^point a <,;KO. how woultl I ieakage tjf st)nie know iecige can hv a \ itai concern lo select one?) companies ihat have focu.sed on inleiicctual capitai T. What resourtcs antl su|ipori tloe.s a CKO ret|uiru? t' ii-inaiion. (,'\m 1. as a C^liO, signing a blank tlieck'-') (). What are the early le.sstHis of experience? (Are Curreni mtnements sLicii as intelieciuai assel (or capi- there any emerging "'critical success factors'" for tal) management antl organizaiionai inteliigence arc C;KOS?) tlosei\- iciateti tt> knov\ietige maiiagemenl. 'iogeliier ~. Ts the role of CKO likely to endiire? (Is it a lempo- witli oliier reiated iiieme,s .sucii as tirganizalional rary role or a shori-term tad?) icarning and inibrmalion management, thev may iie 8. Does knowledge management ret|uirL- a CKO? (Is tonteptualizeti or [iracticeti tliticrentiy trom liie appointing a CKO ihe wrong place to start?) emerging praxis t>f know ietlge miinagemenl or. in somv ca.ses, tiicy may ix- much the same. Ct>ii- .Although, nol surprisingly, we touiui tliltercnces in setjucntly, there arc some ct»rpt>rate executives ieati- wliLil CKOs tliti in their iiartit iilar organizatit)ns, we Ffirl Sloan Maoagemeiil Beview Winter 1999 only the contept ot knowletlge managemeni bui also CEOs have appointed CKOs more through ht)v\ lo sell it lo iiotii corporate anti iine ot kxai nianagemeni. in partituiar, CKOs iiave i'ounti (iiey intuition and instinct than through neeti to engage senior executives one on one lo analysis or strategic logic. Lintiersianti [lossliiir intiiv iciuai or lotai knowietige gajis or opportunilics anti lo iiiiiiate t u.siomizeti knov\iet!ge management firolt-cls. As one C^KO ex- tountt a remaikaiiie siniiiarily in liieir [icrsonai |>ro- piaineti. 'rniess I tan [lersuatic peopie tiiat knowi- liles antl in their exjiericntfs to tlatc.' (Iiiet knovvT etige nianageiucnt is nol just tor liic benefil ot otiier etige othtfr" is an Linusual aiici arifsiing title: as one peopie. I iiavt-n't got mucil iiope oi |-)ersuatiing tiiem partitipant saiii: -I have the honor of having the most to ixiy into it. Tiiey iiave to i>eiicve there's somciiiing 31 prclcntioiis litle in tlic corporaUon," Our suitK sug- in it tor liiem and liiat i care aiiout thai as nun ii as gests tiiat CKOs are also unusuai antl arresiing people they tio. Otiierwise it just comes atross as tiie iatesi toini of tAiiitai manii")uiation.' What Oo CKOs Oo? Tiieiftore. (;KOS spenti a iot ot lime Avaiking aiound 'iiie loic ol tile Ch.O is so immature tiiat there is no tiic organization." In partituiai. tlie\- inteiatt wiiii four ioi) spet ijitation- Different corporations are likeiy to types of managers fscc l-!i>iirc 11. Tiiey iook for tiio.se iiavf tiilferent cxp.'ttations oi' it. So CK< )s iiavt- iiati vviio are exciteti aiiout a partituiar knowletlge man- iirsi to v\-ork out ai agentia for tiieiiiseivt's. aiiti liiey agement itiea or [irojftt ,inti thus iiavf itientificti fommoniy reter to tiie rajiiti iearning involvfti. 'iiiis wiiere improvetiient is possiiiie anti are iikciy Io want is mainiy because their mission or mantiaie is not to !ry .sometiiing nvw. Tiiesc are tiieir knov\-|etige ciear. "Hveryiioti^' lere. me intiutieti. is on a \frtitai chtinifiidiis. Tiiey aiso seek to itientifv from liie iearning curvf ain ut knowietige management." senior executive tatire tiiose wiio are entiliiseti hy atimiiteti one CKO. Aimost invariaiiiy\ CKOs are knowietige management, itieniify witii tiie contt-pt. ,i|i[iointetl In liie Ci-O; one CKO .saiti, "Al tiie time. anti make [luiiiic staiemenis aiiout it, 'i'hese are a|i[ii>inting a Ci\O v\as mm ii more of a giit tt'ciing potentiai know ictigc .s/;o//.vo/\ w iio will invt-st in anti than anvtiiing eise " In tdher words. CI-;Os have support knowictigf management pi-ojeets. appoinleti CKOs more ihrougii intuition anti insiintt tiian tiirougii analysis or stralcgic iogit. Surprisingiv, scvt'ial (^KOs we stutiied aiso spent lime iticntitv ing e\c(.utivfs who are hostile to knowletlge Tile CKC^s we stutlieti ihus hatl lo t!iscovt-r and management antl or the appoinlment of a CKO. They t!f\elop the CI'O's implitit \ ision of how knowletlge sense ihat in a new antl as yt-t ill-tlefinetl corporate management wouki make a tlifteiente.