Knowledge Management Training and Evaluation Team

UNCLAS KABUL 001427 SIPDIS STATE FOR NEASCA/EX STATE FOR IRM/BPC/CST/LD BANGKOK FOR RIMC E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: AADP AMGT PGOV AF SUBJECT: Knowledge Management Training and Evaluation Team visit to Kabul, June 1-5 SUMMARY ======= ¶1. A four-person team, experienced in the application of KM methods, visited Kabul to train staff on classified and unclassified tools currently accessible to them and to evaluate how KM methods could be employed to meet the needs of the U.S. Mission. Network issues aside (these will be addressed by a technical team 10-14 June) the KM team found that, with appropriate training, management attention, policy support and on site KM expertise, currently available systems could meet many of KabulQs needs. Nevertheless, the team learned that the embassy also faces a growing number of issues that require substantial external collaboration where new approaches will have to be developed. TRAINING ======== ¶2. The team ran more than 25 one-hour training and awareness briefings that mission staff were invited to attend on a voluntary basis, These sessions covered Intellipedia, Communities@State, SharePoint, Intelink/uGov email, and Net- Centric Diplomacy. They also provided a forum for the discussion of current workflows and where improvements could be made through the application of IT. Staff were largely unfamiliar with the full range of information sharing and collaboration tools available to them. Perhaps more importantly, use of these tools at post has been ad hoc and most of the examples of good use were not institutionalized but rather were reliant on the interest and enthusiasm of a single individual or small group. ¶3. The team also provided a number of staff one-on-one training at the usersQ desks in the front office, political, SIGAR, CLO and DoJ. It is telling to note that most usersQ classified browsers retained only the default bookmarks to Internet sites. Many were unaware of the resources available to them through NCD and Intellipedia or the current locations of the post SharePoint sites and Communities@State sites. None had a clear understanding of the level of visibility of these various websites across the network or the degree to which information is automatically synchronized, or not, across the networks. Due to time constraints, the team was unable to do much more than generate a modest awareness of some of the capabilities among those trained. Users were encouraged to think about their daily process and how these tools might be incorporated into their work flow. MEETINGS ======== ¶4. The team briefed the Country Team on the overall goals of the visit, the topology of the networks and domains available to the post, and the main tools that would be briefed to staff. The team also had individual meetings with the Deputy Ambassador and Assistant Ambassador to discuss the policy and management implications of the use of the new technology. The Special Inspector General for the Reconstruction and Development activity was also briefed on the KM effort and the impact it could have on the audit, inspection, and investigative process. USAID executive officers and USAID program staff were also briefed and trained in two separate sessions. USAID is moving forward with implementing a stand-alone version of the open- source Drupal content management system on the Internet to provide PRTs team workspace functionality. Personnel from the following sections were trained POL, POLMIL, PRT, FAA, INL, MGT, Rule of Law, DoJ, RAO, PAS, and Elections. The team also met with the USMC liaison officer for 2nd MEB in Afghanistan. He indicated the MEB would take StateQs direction on collaboration methodology but absent clear guidance from State, the MEB would deploy a solution of its choice. ISSUES ====== ¶5. The same KM issues that many enterprises are wrestling with are even more prominent at mission Kabul, where the constraints of the environment bring these issues into sharp relief. The deficiencies of coordinating work by email, for example, is a common problem that private sector institutions are currently addressing by a variety of web-based approaches to information sharing. In Kabul the need for improvements to pure email processes is even more urgent while the infrastructure and capabilities available to support the use of new systems is inadequate. ¶6. During the course of the visit it became clear that many mission activities, particularly those related to reconstruction and development, are done at an entirely unclassified level and often with the direct participation of representatives of external entities, including foreign governments and non- governmental organizations. Since many of the key players in these areas are ineligible for access to U.S. government networks, interactions take place exclusively in face-to-face meetings and through email exchanges, with all of the attendant inefficiencies and lack of management visibility inherent in the use of email. ¶7. Finally, while collaborative systems on the Internet can grow and thrive based entirely on the efforts of a self-selected group of volunteers who manage to learn the technology on their own, for organizations to use these tools effectively resources need to be devoted to training users, establishing policies, and managing the sites. Lacking programmatic support, participation will almost always remain limited and partial adoption is rarely beneficial. Just like email, these systems are most useful only when they are universal. The network effects of having everyone use the technology are large, and the key to successful use of new information-sharing tools. While the level of resources required to achieve full adoption is not particularly high, it is also not zero. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS =============================== ¶8. The Mission to Afghanistan could derive substantial benefit from better use of the KM tools available to it today on internal networks. It could also benefit from more aggressive use of Internet-based collaboration tools that could improve interaction with external partners. Mission Management clearly and forcefully supports the use of new technology to promote information sharing and collaboration and is pragmatic about the need to leverage this technology to maximize mission performance, even if this requires breaking some institutional rice bowls. Nevertheless, Front Office support and availability of the tools are not enough to ensure success, as evidenced by the fact that the Front Office itself is of necessity using email to distribute Daily activity reports and Country Team notes and agendas. ¶9. Local KM team needed. Several organizations within the embassy community have recognized the need for KM professionals in their staffs. Unless the embassy obtains resources in this area, there is a strong possibility that KM will remain disjointed at post and will lack overall management and direction. We see an immediate need for support in this area as KM efforts will otherwise proceed in an uncoordinated fashion. Translating the AmbassadorQs strong support for modernized KM across the mission into reality will require technical, policy, and training capabilities that the post currently lacks. The IMO has requested three contract positions for this function as part of a total IT requirements request for Mission Afghanistan. ¶10. Systems for collaboration on the Internet need to be visible and the information generated in them needs to flow to government systems. Post has a clear and immediate requirement for collaborative systems on the Internet to facilitate interaction with outside entities. As mentioned earlier, USAID and the DoD are already moving to create Internet-based systems to satisfy this immediate need. We believe, however, that if these systems are implemented without also including a way for the information generated in them to enter government systems easily and automatically, a major source of knowledge will be, in effect, stovepiped and probably lost. While we applaud the creation of Internet-based sharing systems to meet immediate needs, we believe that any such system should be built to include the function of easy and automatic sharing of the information generated with internal USG systems. Prior to visiting post the team determined that, with support of services provided by other agencies, setting up such a flow is entirely within the realm of current capabilities. ¶11. State-only systems are of limited utility. In missions like Kabul and many, many others, where almost every issue of substance has interagency interest and participation, collaboration across agency boundaries has become the norm. Systems that are fielded in such a way as to limit the ability to include participants from other agencies are, as a result, less useful than those that allow broad access. SharePoint, for example, would be of more value if it could be easily accessed by other agencies, regardless of their networks. ¶12. Training in KM tools and capabilities needs to begin in Washington. Formal training on Intellipedia, Ugov, Communities at State and SharePoint needs to be integrated into the yearlong Area Studies course, the PRT and Afghan familiarization courses and any other mandatory course for employees traveling to Afghanistan. POST COMMENT ============ ¶13. Post appreciates the time, enthusiasm and dedication that David McKee, John Janek, Kim Allred and Fred Hassani displayed during their six days in Kabul. For both the Elections and PRT teams there has been progress made on getting an easily accessible collaborative site up and running for these two important areas thanks to the KM team. The entire Mission benefitted from their training. Now we require dedicated KM resources here in Kabul to keep the momentum going and we look forward to the Department's quick support in this area.