Stuart Townsend

Currently, Stuart Townsend is Director of Knowledge Management at Sage. He has been involved in Knowledge Management (KM) for over 20 years and has worked in a range of industries with the Financial Times, KPMG, and HSBC.

Recently, Paul Corney has kindly introduced us and we got chatting.

His passion for KM was clear, as it was the wealth of his experience. I appreciated his views and take on KM and decided to invite him for a written interview.

Writing on a personal capacity, Stuart point paths which he has been identifying in the course of his professional experience.

A Portuguese version of this interview is available at KMOL.

Stuart, what is KM for you?

Definitions have changed over time.

As a practitioner, KM is about having a set of skills and disciplines that can be deployed to help an organisation achieve an outcome.

To the outside world (and it may not be perfect), it’s about having the right knowledge, at the right time, and in the right format.

How much of your take on KM comes from your publishing background?

Publishing came after KM for me so it was really about the application of discipline and workflow.

When I first started out, knowledge was collected and put out there, without the necessary thought given to the consumer.

For me, publishing provides a highly complimentary set of skills.

I have heard you say “Knowledge Managers are relationship managers”. Why do you say that?

You may be the smartest person in the room, but if you can’t hold a conversation, explain KM in easy-to-understand terms, and build effective relationships across an organisation, you won’t get very far.

If you were to choose a person to join your KM team, what would you give preference to: good social, relationship skills or knowledge management experience?

It depends on what the needs of the team are. All of those skills are relevant, and I’ve seen many people with non-KM backgrounds blossom into excellent practitioners.

Ultimately though, I’d be looking for that core KM experience. One of the great things about KM is how transferable the skills are across industries. That can also contribute to diversity of thought and approaches.

A Head of IT, a Head of HR, a Head of Communications and a Head of Operations walk into a meeting. Which one should leave with the a new (to-be-created) KM function under his/her remit?

For me, it’s Operations. That creates an opportunity to reach into all aspects of an organisation.

IT is not for me. KM uses technology but isn’t led by it.

“Not all knowledge is created equally”. This is something I also heard from you. Do tell me more.

There are a host of dimensions at work here:

• the shelf life of a piece of knowledge;
• how often it is used;
• the impact that it has.

This is important in determining where resources are deployed and demonstrating a return on investment.

KM should answer the needs to a) make money, b) save money, or c) help to manage a risk

You believe in creating and maintaining a consistent, standardised and friendly experience when accessing (and thus creating) content. Why is that so important?

We have to consider our consumers. If the majority of access is online, then a familiar, easy-to-use experience will be much better for them.

If we think about publishing content, that needs to be made as easy as possible too. The more complex we make KM, the less likely it is to become embedded. The process for aggregating knowledge will differ, depending on the context, which varies considerably.

Please allow me to be provocative. Is there a risk of such standardisation stifling innovation?

Yes, absolutely.

The key here is context. There’s a big difference between providing a collection of knowledge to support customers at the macro level and deeper, more specific, tailored KM efforts.

It’s a judgement call as to how far you go with this. Having a framework can make things much more efficient, particularly when time-to-market is critical.

Let’s talk about KPIs. Are KPIs for KM really necessary?

KPIs have always been, and continue to be a challenge but yes, they are.

In an ideal world, you link to making money, saving money, or managing a risk.

How you do that is another story!

What would be the 2 or 3 things you would recommend to a fellow KMer who'd like to bullet-proof KM against being dropped at the first reshuffle or at the first sign of an economic crisis?

1. In a corporate environment, KM should answer the needs to a) make money, b) save money, or c) help to manage a risk; find that angle
2. Always look outwards and take account of what is going on across the organisation - no program or initiative has a divine right to exist, so be prepared to flex and adapt
3. Have your PR in order; publicise wins, progress, and what is being learned along the way - keep KM on the agenda