Difference between revisions of "Preservation"
m (62 revisions imported: NKM wiki import 20150315) |
DavidBeraha (Talk | contribs) (→Description) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Organizations that do not pay attention to KP may face negative consequences (such as suffering losses or | Organizations that do not pay attention to KP may face negative consequences (such as suffering losses or | ||
even worse, bankruptcy) if [[Critical knowledge|critical knowledge]] required by an organization is not preserved. In the case of the | even worse, bankruptcy) if [[Critical knowledge|critical knowledge]] required by an organization is not preserved. In the case of the | ||
| − | nuclear industry, if critical knowledge associated with regulation, construction, design, maintenance, operation and | + | nuclear industry, if critical knowledge associated with regulation, construction, design, maintenance, operation and decommissioning is not preserved it can lead to incidents, accidents and other significant events. An example is the |
| − | + | ||
Okiluto-3 EPR NPP currently being constructed in Finland. The project experienced construction and welding | Okiluto-3 EPR NPP currently being constructed in Finland. The project experienced construction and welding | ||
problems because critical knowledge associated with methods and quality assurance had been lost among local | problems because critical knowledge associated with methods and quality assurance had been lost among local | ||
contractors in Finland. This resulted in delays in construction. | contractors in Finland. This resulted in delays in construction. | ||
| − | One of the questions being raised concerning the | + | One of the questions being raised concerning the 'nuclear renaissance' is the availability of critical knowledge |
required to forge large pressure vessels and steam generators. Recent surveys of suppliers indicate this capability | required to forge large pressure vessels and steam generators. Recent surveys of suppliers indicate this capability | ||
has been lost in many countries because there was a long period of time in which no new reactors were built. It is | has been lost in many countries because there was a long period of time in which no new reactors were built. It is | ||
| Line 32: | Line 31: | ||
therefore aids in transforming a regular organization into a ‘learning organization’. | therefore aids in transforming a regular organization into a ‘learning organization’. | ||
| − | Depending on an organization’s level of | + | Depending on an organization’s level of KM maturity (i.e. the phase of development in KM processes), it may |
need to embark on KP as a means of preserving critical knowledge to secure its future. | need to embark on KP as a means of preserving critical knowledge to secure its future. | ||
<!-- '''Source:''' [[Comparative Analysis of Methods and Tools for Nuclear Knowledge Preservation]] --> | <!-- '''Source:''' [[Comparative Analysis of Methods and Tools for Nuclear Knowledge Preservation]] --> | ||
Revision as of 11:28, 18 June 2015
Definition
Preservation is The process of keeping knowledge in its original state
Description
As an organization matures, the preservation of implicit and tacit knowledge will become more dominant, leading to preservation of process knowledge (work flow).
The main purpose of all KP efforts is to develop a KP mechanism in which knowledge is being preserved as it is created. In this way all types of knowledge — including explicit, implicit and tacit — will be captured. In order to achieve this, different methods and tools must be employed. Within the KM context, it is obvious that nuclear KP plays a vital role. Preserving existing nuclear knowledge, specialist expertise, and in general preventing the loss of vital technical and historical information is starting to be recognized as strategically important to the nuclear industry, in particular for nuclear facilities. As such, the development of KP approaches and tools based on innovative approaches, including the use of modern information technology, are becoming a necessity.
Organizations that do not pay attention to KP may face negative consequences (such as suffering losses or even worse, bankruptcy) if critical knowledge required by an organization is not preserved. In the case of the nuclear industry, if critical knowledge associated with regulation, construction, design, maintenance, operation and decommissioning is not preserved it can lead to incidents, accidents and other significant events. An example is the Okiluto-3 EPR NPP currently being constructed in Finland. The project experienced construction and welding problems because critical knowledge associated with methods and quality assurance had been lost among local contractors in Finland. This resulted in delays in construction.
One of the questions being raised concerning the 'nuclear renaissance' is the availability of critical knowledge required to forge large pressure vessels and steam generators. Recent surveys of suppliers indicate this capability has been lost in many countries because there was a long period of time in which no new reactors were built. It is believed that organizations which pay attention to KP and make it a part of their objectives tend to keep a competitive edge. This is likely the reason that more mature organizations are now concerned about the preservation of institutional memory. An underlying benefit of KP is that it helps to improve work processes and therefore aids in transforming a regular organization into a ‘learning organization’.
Depending on an organization’s level of KM maturity (i.e. the phase of development in KM processes), it may need to embark on KP as a means of preserving critical knowledge to secure its future.
