Comments on: KM standard controversy: lessons from the environment sector in regard to open, inclusive, participatory processes https://realkm.com/2018/03/23/km-standard-controversy-lessons-from-the-environment-sector-in-regard-to-open-inclusive-participatory-processes/ Evidence based. Practical results. Sat, 09 Dec 2023 03:46:39 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.2 By: Bruce Boyes https://realkm.com/2018/03/23/km-standard-controversy-lessons-from-the-environment-sector-in-regard-to-open-inclusive-participatory-processes/#comment-18490 Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:43:40 +0000 http://realkm.com/?p=10954#comment-18490 In reply to Bill Kaplan.

Many thanks Bill for your comment. A retrospect could be valuable if ISO was able to take the learning on board, but sadly I think that they’re some way away from this at present.

I’ve written a further article on risks and opportunities in the implementation of the standard, which can be found at http://realkm.com/2018/04/06/implementing-km-standard-iso-30401-risks-and-opportunities/ I’m still very hopeful that we can achieve strong consensus support for the standard, and that it will help us to achieve good outcomes.

Best regards, Bruce.

]]> By: Bill Kaplan https://realkm.com/2018/03/23/km-standard-controversy-lessons-from-the-environment-sector-in-regard-to-open-inclusive-participatory-processes/#comment-17659 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:16:37 +0000 http://realkm.com/?p=10954#comment-17659 Thank you Bruce for what is clearly a lot of research and a well thought through opinion with solid examples to make the points you offer. Developing a standard is a start and the outcome for any effort is always driven by balance in the process that gets one there.

I am glad that we are moving forward with this standard and perhaps a “retrospect” (learning after a project or phase of a project) on this process would be useful in making future changes in the standards development process. I would even facilitate it!

]]>