KMCI Position Statement on Knowledge Management Standards and “Certification” Programs
Abstract: Some individuals and organizations around the world have begun work on KM standards formulation. These include the Global Knowledge Economics Council (GKEC) with ANSI accreditation in the United States, the British Standards Institute (BSI) in the UK, the Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) and the European Commission’s KnowledgeBoard Framework and Standards SIG on the Continent, and Standards Australia International (SAI). The activities of these organizations have been well-summarized in the past by David Skyrme. These efforts all differ in the degree to which they advocate for standards, but to one degree or other, all have committed to the idea that valid standards for the discipline of Knowledge Management can be formulated from processes begun now, rather than at some time in the future or not at all.
KMCI thinks it is important to examine this fundamental assumption, as well as a number of other subsidiary issues related to standards and certification. Let’s begin with the proposition that the KM community is ready for standards formulation. After that, we will discuss whether KM standards should be formulated under the auspices of organizations external to KM; whether multiple independent organizations are required, or are even a good idea, for certification training; and finally, whether professional associations offering certification programs need to accredited.
Joseph M. Firestone: KMCI Position Statement on KM Standards and “Certification” Programs. Alexandria, VA: Knowledge Management Consortium International, April 28, 2003
Copyright © Knowledge Management Consortium International.Favorite!
Tags: certification, independent accereditation, KM certificate vs certification, KM certification programs, KM certification training, KM standards, KM training, knowledge management, Knowledge Management Consortium International (KMCI)*« Previous Article Next Article »