Knowledge

UNIVERSAL RULES (apply to every knowledge capture task)

• NEVER treat the departing employee's account as the complete truth -- cross-reference with documentation and other stakeholders where possible
• NEVER let knowledge capture become a blame session -- frame all capture as organisational learning, not performance review
• NEVER classify knowledge as LOW RISK without checking whether anyone else actually holds it -- "I thought [person] knew this too" is a common and expensive mistake
• NEVER publish a knowledge article without a reviewer confirming accuracy -- mark as DRAFT until reviewed
• NEVER skip the "what we should NOT try again" question -- this is often the most valuable institutional knowledge captured
• ALWAYS include specific recommended actions and timeline

BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION

CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS

Required (ask if not provided):

• Who is the departing employee? (name and role)
• When is their departure date?

Optional (ask if context suggests value):

• What are the known critical knowledge areas this person holds?
• Has a successor been identified?
• Is this reactive (departure confirmed) or proactive (no departure planned)?

If information is missing: Run the full five-factor risk assessment to identify knowledge areas. Use hr.local.md defaults for session logistics and article storage. State assumptions about risk classification explicitly.

MANDATORY OUTPUT HEADER

Every output must begin with:

TASK:          Knowledge Capture Plan -- [Employee Name]
DOCUMENT TYPE: Knowledge Capture Plan
JURISDICTION:  [From hr.local.md or user input]
CONFIGURATION: [hr.local.md loaded / best practices]
SENSITIVITY:   CONFIDENTIAL

KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE WORKFLOW

Phase 1: Knowledge Risk Assessment

Before designing a capture plan, assess the risk:

HIGH RISK:

• Sole holder of critical knowledge (no one else knows this)
• Knowledge is client-facing or revenue-critical
• Departure is confirmed or imminent
• Knowledge is undocumented
• No successor identified or ready

MEDIUM RISK:

• Significant knowledge holder (others have partial knowledge)
• Some documentation exists but incomplete
• Departure possible in 6-12 months
• Successor exists but not yet fully prepared

LOW RISK:

• Knowledge broadly distributed in team
• Well-documented
• Multiple holders
• Successor fully prepared

RISK SCORING (score each factor 1-3): Tenure: <2 years (1) | 2-5 years (2) | 5+ years (3) Role criticality: Support (1) | Specialist (2) | Leadership/sole expert (3) Documentation level: Well documented (1) | Partial (2) | Undocumented (3) Successor readiness: Ready (1) | Developing (2) | None identified (3) Client/revenue impact: None (1) | Some (2) | Direct and significant (3)

TOTAL SCORE: 5-7: LOW RISK -- standard handover document 8-10: MEDIUM RISK -- 2 knowledge capture sessions; 3-4 knowledge articles 11-15: HIGH RISK -- full capture programme; 3+ sessions; immediate escalation

Phase 2: Proactive vs. Reactive Capture

REACTIVE (triggered by departure): Urgent; comprehensive; time-limited Generate a knowledge capture plan immediately on resignation. Prioritise: what is ONLY in this person's head?

PROACTIVE (no departure planned): Systematic; can be thorough Annual knowledge review for HIGH-risk knowledge holders. Focus on the knowledge most likely to be lost if departure occurs. Build knowledge articles over time, not all at once.

Phase 3: Generate Capture Plan

For each knowledge holder, capture plan includes:

EMPLOYEE: [Name] | ROLE: [Role] | TENURE: [Years] | RISK: [H/M/L] KEY KNOWLEDGE AREAS (ranked by risk):

1. [Area -- describe what makes this knowledge unique or hard to replace]
2. [Area]
3. [Area]

CAPTURE METHOD:

• Interview-based (recommended for complex tacit knowledge)
• Document review (for knowledge that IS documented but needs curation)
• Shadowing / observation (for procedural or behavioural knowledge)
• Pair working (for technical or skills transfer)

SESSIONS RECOMMENDED: [N] sessions x [duration] = [total hours] Session 1: [Knowledge area] -- [Method] -- [Date] Session 2: [Knowledge area] -- [Method] -- [Date]

OUTPUTS: [Document type] -- [Title] -- [Target completion]

Phase 4: Knowledge Interview Guide

OPENING (5 minutes): "The goal of this session is to make sure the knowledge and insights you've built up over [N] years here don't disappear when you leave. There are no wrong answers -- we want what's in your head, not what's in the documents."

CORE QUESTIONS (by knowledge area):

FOR CLIENT / STAKEHOLDER KNOWLEDGE:

• "Tell me about [client/stakeholder]. Who are the real decision-makers -- not just the named contacts but the people whose opinion actually counts?"
• "What has gone wrong in this relationship and how was it recovered? What would you do differently?"
• "What are the unwritten rules? Things that aren't in any document but that the next person needs to know?"
• "What does [client/stakeholder] actually care about most? Not what the contract says -- what makes them feel it's working?"

FOR PROCESS / METHODOLOGY KNOWLEDGE:

• "Our process says [X]. Where does reality differ from the documentation?"
• "What are the early warning signs that something is going wrong? The signals you've learned to watch for?"
• "What decisions do you make yourself vs. escalate? Walk me through a recent example."
• "If I followed our documented process exactly, what would I get wrong?"

FOR ORGANISATIONAL / CONTEXT KNOWLEDGE:

• "What would you tell someone starting your role tomorrow that is not in any document?"
• "What has this organisation tried that didn't work, and why? What should we not try again?"
• "Who are the internal stakeholders I need to manage carefully? What do I need to know about each of them?"
• "What are you most worried we'll get wrong after you leave?"
• "If you were staying, what would you do in the next 12 months that we haven't done yet?"

CLOSING: "Is there anything we haven't talked about that you think is important for the next person to know?"

Phase 5: Knowledge Article Structure (output from sessions)

KNOWLEDGE ARTICLE: [Title]
================================================================
Author:    [Departing employee] | Captured by: [HR/manager]
Date:      [Date of capture] | Reviewed by: [HR] | Status: DRAFT
Category:  [Client / Process / Organisational / Technical]
Audience:  [Successor / Team / Whole organisation]

THE KNOWLEDGE
[What to know -- the substance, in plain language]

WHEN IT APPLIES
[Context: when does this knowledge become relevant?]

EXCEPTIONS AND EDGE CASES
[When does the standard approach NOT apply?]

RELATED CONTACTS
[Who else holds related knowledge?]

RELATED DOCUMENTS
[What documentation exists that this supplements?]

CONFIDENCE LEVEL
[HIGH: this is definitely how it works
 MEDIUM: this is the expert's interpretation; verify with [name]
 LOW: this may be out of date; confirm with [name] before relying]
================================================================

OUTPUT FORMAT

TASK:          Knowledge Capture Plan -- [Employee Name]
DOCUMENT TYPE: Knowledge Capture Plan
JURISDICTION:  [Jurisdiction]
CONFIGURATION: [hr.local.md status]
SENSITIVITY:   CONFIDENTIAL

KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE PLAN: [Name]
================================================================
Role: [Title] | Tenure: [Years] | Risk: [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]

KEY KNOWLEDGE AREAS:
  1. [Area -- what makes it unique]
  2. [Area]

CAPTURE METHOD: [Interview / Document review / Shadowing / Pair working]

SESSIONS:
  Session 1: [Knowledge area] -- [Duration] -- [Date]
  Session 2: [Knowledge area] -- [Duration] -- [Date]

OUTPUTS:
  [Document type] -- [Title] -- [Target date]

INTERVIEW GUIDE:
  [Questions by knowledge area -- client/process/organisational]
================================================================

NEVER DO THESE

• NEVER treat the departing employee's account as the complete truth -- cross-reference with documentation and other stakeholders where possible
• NEVER let knowledge capture become a blame session -- frame all capture as organisational learning, not performance review
• NEVER classify knowledge as LOW RISK without checking whether anyone else actually holds it
• NEVER publish a knowledge article without a reviewer confirming accuracy -- mark as DRAFT until reviewed
• NEVER skip the "what we should NOT try again" question -- this is often the most valuable institutional knowledge captured

AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES

• APQC (apqc.org) — Knowledge management best practices, maturity model, benchmarking data
• Nonaka & Takeuchi, The Knowledge-Creating Company (1995) — SECI model for tacit-to-explicit knowledge conversion
• NASA Lessons Learned database (llis.nasa.gov) — Example of institutional knowledge capture at scale
• KM World (kmworld.com) — Knowledge management industry research and case studies

ALL OUTPUTS REQUIRE REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL BEFORE USE IN BUSINESS DECISIONS.