Everyone in the industry seems to have a database for “Lessons Learned.” I’m not sure how beneficial these databases are yet, as I have yet to see how they get around the industry’s knowledge management problem: Teams need to know the Lesson Learned at the right time in the project.
With a database, the team is expected to search manually for a Lesson Learned that may apply to their current project. It’s easy to lose track of these tasks as there could be a near infinite amount of Lessons Learned to incorporate. This task itself becomes an administrative nightmare.
How can a team plan for mitigating a Lesson Learned that may be relevant in 6 months?
In my research for ASQ’s CCQM certification (I’m helping write the Body of Knowledge), I came across this quote from Tim Howarth and David Greenwood’s Construction Quality Management: Principles and Practice: “However, recent research into cross-project learning led Newell to conclude that ‘there is accumulating evidence that the medium of capture and transfer through ICT (information and communications technologies) such as databases and corporate intranets is limited in terms of how far such technology can actually facilitate knowledge sharing” (148).
I believe this happens because the database doesn’t teach anyone anything. Yes, it tells us something, but nothing is learned. Learning is evident when people’s behavior changes from the last project to the next one. That change in behavior is what actually prevents the problem from happening again.
Instead of trying to track every Lesson Learned and figure out when and where it should go, what if we instead think about how we can change project team behavior for the better? The ideas surrounding planning presented in How Big Things Get Done are a great starting point. When we see “planning” as a behavior, how can we plan better?
The solution may be treating Lessons Learned like materials and equipment: needing to be delivered “Just in Time.”
Leave a Reply