One of the next big things mentioned is the concept of cloud computing. In computer terms, it is similar to the Linux, being open-sourced and attainable for use tapered to uniquely suit one's needs. It has tremendous benefits in the long run, and the world has already began heading towards that direction. However, other than the ethical and privacy concerns, the major overhaul of an existing system to be replaced by cloud computing would definitely generate one thing: a lot of excess work through maintenance. It can be the legislative issue of monitoring and keeping up with digital crime, or it can be the financial issue of collecting monthly fees from millions of people who might or might not pay up, or pay up late. Sure, the software updates are much easier and quicker. However, in the aspect of maintenance alone, could we be taking on step forward and two steps backwards?
Moving on to knowledge management, I had an interesting experience of it during my army days. I was appointed to be the main man for a newly introduced knowledge management system, known as e-SILK. It is basically a 'cloud' system whereby knowledge and information can be shared in the armed forces. It was an intricate system based on precise computing, and thus it isn't very user-friendly. After wrestling with the system for a while, I had assumed my role. However, close to the end of my tenure in the SAF, it occurred to me that a knowledge management system required knowledge management too. Ironic? While passing down my 'knowledge', it became evident that it was impossible to completely educate someone of a system i spent months running through. Knowledge is non-transferrable in many scenarios. When there is a change in personnel in an organization, it is inevitable that gapping holes are left behind, depending on the individual's knowledge and involvement during his or her stay. It actually made me wonder if knowledge management is hokum.
While I was teaching my understudy how to use the system, it was on a personal level. I sat next to him and taught him. There was a presentation in class on this form of education, as compared to one which threw you information in a system and trusted you to be able to come up with your own epiphany eventually. Of course, people like us who are immersed in the digital world would yearn for a more personal touch to everything. On the other hand, ICT is driving the input of knowledge in a server where it can be easily accessed and acquired without the work of personal touches. However, as mentioned above, the personal touch is still (sometimes) essential to impart knowledge in the field of ICT. It's starting to sound like the chicken and egg story. Isn't it such a paradox?
Once again linking to my army story, it has another lesson that goes in line with one of our discussions. It is the lesson that effective management can make or break ICT development. There are many kinds of people: some of them are quickly adaptable, some are skeptical and some can not even be budged from status quo. Managing various kinds of people well is the key to effective ICT distribution and development in an organization. You cannot just implement a system forcefully or just throw them a manual and expect them to learn. You may have attained your objective of implementing the system, but if the use of it is not effective, productivity suffers and the whole organization can be seen as suffering a loss. Patience is indeed a virtue in this case. Educate slowly and patiently.
Spending 3 hours on 1 topic is actually quite ideal, as both the depth and breath of the topic are sufficiently covered. Moreover, ICT is a topic that would have most people raising their eyebrows. On the whole, it was a great lesson. Kudos.
9/10
No comments:
Post a Comment