Interview with Richard Van West-Charles

Citation

Stankosky, M. (2006), "Interview with Richard Van West-Charles", VINE, Vol. 36 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/vine.2006.28736baa.002

Interview with Richard Van West-Charles

Interview with Richard Van West-Charles

Richard Van West-Charles, Bsc, MD, MPH; Area Manager, Information and Knowledge Management, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), a regional office of the World Health Organization (WHO). Dr Van West-Charles is both a Proponent and Innovator of Knowledge Management (KM) practices, and his experience in both creating a strategy and implementing it at PAHO/WHO is of much benefit to other executives.

Why KM at PAHO? What is the connection between PAHO and KM? How do you define KM and what results do you expect to see? How did you get appointed?

I assume you are referring to my recent appointment as Area Manager for Information and Knowledge Management. Towards the end of 2002, I attended a weeklong workshop at the Judge Institute, Cambridge University on Knowledge Management and its relationship to the work of the World Health Organization. In 2003, at the beginning of the new administration at PAHO/WHO, I was asked to take up the post of Area Manager for Information and Knowledge Management. Although the work of the organization is based on the generation and use of knowledge, the concept and understanding of knowledge management was new, and hence raised much suspicion.

Is KM understood throughout PAHO?

As I stated earlier, knowledge is our business, but the understanding of KM presents a challenge. This is so because generally everyone initially felt that we were efficient at what we do. However, a broad-based group was established to address the development of a strategy for KM. This was done using a SWOT analysis, and by asking ourselves three questions:

1. 1.

   Where we are as a knowledge-based organization?

2. 2.

   Where do we want to be?

3. 3.

   How do we want to get there?

This has permitted the organization to understand the issues, and hence the need for change. Hence, we have started on a conceptual journey with the support of our staff, and the staff from George Washington University, to basically introduce the concept and explore the use of KM tools in the work of PAHO/WHO by staff throughout the organization. So, the straight answer is, we are working on the collective understanding by all staff.

What do you consider as barriers to success?

The change required demands attention to issues related to belief and behavior of the staff in relation to knowledge sharing. Additionally the role and use of technology to enable the processes is also a critical issue. Hence, one can say that the barriers of culture and the embrace of technology in support of the implementation exist, and must be addressed.

How did you go about implementing KM?

As I mentioned, the first step was the development of a KM strategy. From that point, we then proceeded to develop the implementation plan with a specified time frame. We also commenced sensitizing the members of Executive Management and all senior managers of the organization as to the diagnosis and the value which the change brings in terms of efficiency and effectiveness for the attainment of the mission of the organization.

What do you consider a successful KM program at PAHO (metrics)?

At PAHO/WHO KM is introduced as a cross cutting approach which must be embraced. It is presented as having three principal functions:

1. 1.

   developing knowledge;

2. 2.

   sharing Knowledge; and

3. 3.

   application of knowledge.

At this point, it is difficult to define success, but from the institutional aspect we have Executive Management and senior managers embracing the strategy and allocating resources accordingly. This is a clear indicator that KM will be institutionalized at PAHO/WHO.

Is KM different in PAHO/WHO than in private organizations that you observed?

At PAHO/WHO KM is applicable to both the internal and the external environments, and seeks to involve different actors in the interest of human health. There is the possibility of cultural barriers to sharing, especially in the virtual mode; and since we work with multiple partners, this presents a challenge. In the private sector, although there probably are similar concerns, the defined advantage to cooperation would probable be much more transparent than in the public sector. In essence, sharing knowledge must be understood as advantageous to the individual and the corporate mission.

What would you pass along to others trying to implement KM?

One needs to be patient and to spend time dialoguing about the value for the individual and the unit of operation. One needs to be practical, flexible, and to know when to step back strategically. Find people who are on board conceptually to demonstrate success, and be aware that many would say and use the terminology of KM, but do not necessarily understand the concept, but use it because it is in vogue. This can create more conceptual problems for you. KM is what will make a different in terms of globalization, and also in addressing the inequities of access to knowledge, which is the empowering approach for development.

Michael Stankosky