What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Help me choose my new title (1 Viewer)

Long Ball Larry said:
Jutz said:
CKO - Chief Knowledge Officer

A chief knowledge officer (CKO) is an organizational leader, responsible for ensuring that the organization maximizes the value it achieves through "knowledge". The CKO is responsible for managing intellectual capital and the custodian of Knowledge Management practices in an organization. CKO is not just a relabelling of the title "chief information officer" - the CKO role is much broader. CKOs can help an organization maximize the returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes and intellectual capital), exploit their intangible assets (know-how, patents, customer relationships), repeat successes, share best practices, improve innovation, and avoid knowledge loss after organizational restructuring.

CKOs must have skills across a wide variety of areas. They must be good at developing/understanding the big picture, advocacy (articulation, promotion and justification of the knowledge agenda, sometimes against cynicism or even open hostility), project and people management (oversight of a variety of activities, attention to detail, ability to motivate), communications (communicating clearly the knowledge agenda, have good listening skills and be sensitive to organizational opportunities and obstacles), leadership, teamworking, influencing, and interpersonal skills. The CKO who successfully combines these skills is well equipped as an excellent agent of change for their organization.
Click to expand...
I don't really think that's what he does.
Click to expand...
They must be good at understanding the big picture and have skills across a wide variety of areas... with all the departments EG oversees I would think he has to have a good understanding of the big picture and his scope is definitely wide.

CKO can help an organization maximize returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes, and intellectual capitol). Being directly in charge of customer service, pricing, IT, margin analysis, and shipping / logistics most likely includes making sure the company maximizes returns on investment in these areas. All areas have processes which I am sure EG would know what people belong in these areas, what those 'best practices' are, and has to make sure the employees follow them. Even shipping / logistics involves knowing what processes, and knowledge is needed in order to maximize company profits.

I think most people think CKO is heavily involved in IT, but the description specifically states it is not a re-packaging of that title. There is much more to it, and EG did say he was in direct charge of IT so there is some overlap.

But most important... it is a real title that people use and it sounds bad ###.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jutz said:
Long Ball Larry said:
Jutz said:
CKO - Chief Knowledge Officer

A chief knowledge officer (CKO) is an organizational leader, responsible for ensuring that the organization maximizes the value it achieves through "knowledge". The CKO is responsible for managing intellectual capital and the custodian of Knowledge Management practices in an organization. CKO is not just a relabelling of the title "chief information officer" - the CKO role is much broader. CKOs can help an organization maximize the returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes and intellectual capital), exploit their intangible assets (know-how, patents, customer relationships), repeat successes, share best practices, improve innovation, and avoid knowledge loss after organizational restructuring.

CKOs must have skills across a wide variety of areas. They must be good at developing/understanding the big picture, advocacy (articulation, promotion and justification of the knowledge agenda, sometimes against cynicism or even open hostility), project and people management (oversight of a variety of activities, attention to detail, ability to motivate), communications (communicating clearly the knowledge agenda, have good listening skills and be sensitive to organizational opportunities and obstacles), leadership, teamworking, influencing, and interpersonal skills. The CKO who successfully combines these skills is well equipped as an excellent agent of change for their organization.
Click to expand...
I don't really think that's what he does.
Click to expand...
They must be good at understanding the big picture and have skills across a wide variety of areas... with all the departments EG oversees I would think he has to have a good understanding of the big picture and his scope is definitely wide.

CKO can help an organization maximize returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes, and intellectual capitol). Being directly in charge of customer service, pricing, IT, margin analysis, and shipping / logistics most likely includes making sure the company maximizes returns on investment in these areas. All areas have processes which I am sure EG would know what people belong in these areas, what those 'best practices' are, and has to make sure the employees follow them. Even shipping / logistics involves knowing what processes, and knowledge is needed in order to maximize company profits.

I think most people think CKO is heavily involved in IT, but the description specifically states it is not a re-packaging of that title. There is much more to it, and EG did say he was in direct charge of IT so there is some overlap.

But most important... it is a real title that people use and it sounds bad ###.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but it seems to me like EG is more involved in the day-to-day operations than a CKO normally would be. A CKO's activities are a little more abstract, I would say.

 
Long Ball Larry said:
Jutz said:
Long Ball Larry said:
Jutz said:
CKO - Chief Knowledge Officer

A chief knowledge officer (CKO) is an organizational leader, responsible for ensuring that the organization maximizes the value it achieves through "knowledge". The CKO is responsible for managing intellectual capital and the custodian of Knowledge Management practices in an organization. CKO is not just a relabelling of the title "chief information officer" - the CKO role is much broader. CKOs can help an organization maximize the returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes and intellectual capital), exploit their intangible assets (know-how, patents, customer relationships), repeat successes, share best practices, improve innovation, and avoid knowledge loss after organizational restructuring.

CKOs must have skills across a wide variety of areas. They must be good at developing/understanding the big picture, advocacy (articulation, promotion and justification of the knowledge agenda, sometimes against cynicism or even open hostility), project and people management (oversight of a variety of activities, attention to detail, ability to motivate), communications (communicating clearly the knowledge agenda, have good listening skills and be sensitive to organizational opportunities and obstacles), leadership, teamworking, influencing, and interpersonal skills. The CKO who successfully combines these skills is well equipped as an excellent agent of change for their organization.
Click to expand...
I don't really think that's what he does.
Click to expand...
They must be good at understanding the big picture and have skills across a wide variety of areas... with all the departments EG oversees I would think he has to have a good understanding of the big picture and his scope is definitely wide.

CKO can help an organization maximize returns on investment in knowledge (people, processes, and intellectual capitol). Being directly in charge of customer service, pricing, IT, margin analysis, and shipping / logistics most likely includes making sure the company maximizes returns on investment in these areas. All areas have processes which I am sure EG would know what people belong in these areas, what those 'best practices' are, and has to make sure the employees follow them. Even shipping / logistics involves knowing what processes, and knowledge is needed in order to maximize company profits.

I think most people think CKO is heavily involved in IT, but the description specifically states it is not a re-packaging of that title. There is much more to it, and EG did say he was in direct charge of IT so there is some overlap.

But most important... it is a real title that people use and it sounds bad ###.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but it seems to me like EG is more involved in the day-to-day operations than a CKO normally would be. A CKO's activities are a little more abstract, I would say.
Click to expand...
I agree it's probably a stretch... but if I were stretching, that's what I would stretch for. And it sounds like EG would be open to a stretch. I just think it sounds really cool. And unique. And since it is not that common, not many people would really be able to question him on it.

 
Cko? That's ridiculous and sounds made up. The point of a title is to convey (1) your level of importance and (2) what you do or control. If the next thing out of someone's mouth is "what does that mean?" When you tell then your title then it is not a title - it's a vanity exercise.

You want a C title if they approve it and it will help you for your role if people think you are an executive decision maker. Vp is good if you are under age 35 because the only people with c titles under that age are working for a small company or are the founder. If you are a c title under 35 and are neither the founder or a first 5 employee then other c's won't see you as a peer; they will see you as the nephew of the guy they really need to be talking to.

If you are over 35 and can get a c title, great. But beware: if there is an acquisition or lawsuit or 100 other things you will get pulled in to it since you are an executive.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Abraham said:
Cko? That's ridiculous and sounds made up. The point of a title is to convey (1) your level of importance and (2) what you do or control. If the next thing out of someone's mouth is "what does that mean?" When you tell then your title then it is not a title - it's a vanity exercise.

You want a C title if they approve it and it will help you for your role if people think you are an executive decision maker. Vp is good if you are under age 35 because the only people with c titles under that age are working for a small company or are the founder. If you are a c title under 35 and are neither the founder or a first 5 employee then other c's won't see you as a peer; they will see you as the nephew of the guy they really need to be talking to.

If you are over 35 and can get a c title, great. But beware: if there is an acquisition or lawsuit or 100 other things you will get pulled in to it since you are an executive.
Click to expand...
I don't think it sounds ridiculous at all... but that is purely subjective. And even though it sounds made up... it isn't. I found the description on Wikipedia. You say the point of a title is to convey level of importance. If you have a C title (as you discussed) that alone conveys your level of importance. The other part is to convey what you do or control. Well, EG has a ton of knowledge in a lot of different areas so he would be in control of that knowledge. I also greatly disagree that when people ask 'what does that mean' as being a bad thing. That would actually allow you to come up with your own answer that makes you sound more important then you acutally might be. When you do give an answer it would make it look like you are the one that is 'in the know' and there is power in that. Like you said... a C title will help your role in making people think you are an executive decision maker. It sounded to me like EG was looking for a title that would make him look good. Especially if he had to look for a job at a later date.

 
Jutz said:
Abraham said:
Cko? That's ridiculous and sounds made up. The point of a title is to convey (1) your level of importance and (2) what you do or control. If the next thing out of someone's mouth is "what does that mean?" When you tell then your title then it is not a title - it's a vanity exercise.

You want a C title if they approve it and it will help you for your role if people think you are an executive decision maker. Vp is good if you are under age 35 because the only people with c titles under that age are working for a small company or are the founder. If you are a c title under 35 and are neither the founder or a first 5 employee then other c's won't see you as a peer; they will see you as the nephew of the guy they really need to be talking to.

If you are over 35 and can get a c title, great. But beware: if there is an acquisition or lawsuit or 100 other things you will get pulled in to it since you are an executive.
Click to expand...
I don't think it sounds ridiculous at all... but that is purely subjective. And even though it sounds made up... it isn't. I found the description on Wikipedia. You say the point of a title is to convey level of importance. If you have a C title (as you discussed) that alone conveys your level of importance. The other part is to convey what you do or control. Well, EG has a ton of knowledge in a lot of different areas so he would be in control of that knowledge. I also greatly disagree that when people ask 'what does that mean' as being a bad thing. That would actually allow you to come up with your own answer that makes you sound more important then you acutally might be. When you do give an answer it would make it look like you are the one that is 'in the know' and there is power in that. Like you said... a C title will help your role in making people think you are an executive decision maker. It sounded to me like EG was looking for a title that would make him look good. Especially if he had to look for a job at a later date.
Click to expand...
If someone told me they were the CKO I would assume it meant they were responsible for share point, documentation, process/procedure, Six Sigma, etc. I wouldn't think that meant they retained a lot of knowledge about the site.

I don't mean to be argumentative, I promise. But CIO is far more accepted for his role (IT, back-office, process) then CKO. IF he can get the CIO tag, that's one worth getting exited about.

 
Abraham said:
Jutz said:
Abraham said:
Cko? That's ridiculous and sounds made up. The point of a title is to convey (1) your level of importance and (2) what you do or control. If the next thing out of someone's mouth is "what does that mean?" When you tell then your title then it is not a title - it's a vanity exercise.

You want a C title if they approve it and it will help you for your role if people think you are an executive decision maker. Vp is good if you are under age 35 because the only people with c titles under that age are working for a small company or are the founder. If you are a c title under 35 and are neither the founder or a first 5 employee then other c's won't see you as a peer; they will see you as the nephew of the guy they really need to be talking to.

If you are over 35 and can get a c title, great. But beware: if there is an acquisition or lawsuit or 100 other things you will get pulled in to it since you are an executive.
Click to expand...
I don't think it sounds ridiculous at all... but that is purely subjective. And even though it sounds made up... it isn't. I found the description on Wikipedia. You say the point of a title is to convey level of importance. If you have a C title (as you discussed) that alone conveys your level of importance. The other part is to convey what you do or control. Well, EG has a ton of knowledge in a lot of different areas so he would be in control of that knowledge. I also greatly disagree that when people ask 'what does that mean' as being a bad thing. That would actually allow you to come up with your own answer that makes you sound more important then you acutally might be. When you do give an answer it would make it look like you are the one that is 'in the know' and there is power in that. Like you said... a C title will help your role in making people think you are an executive decision maker. It sounded to me like EG was looking for a title that would make him look good. Especially if he had to look for a job at a later date.
Click to expand...
If someone told me they were the CKO I would assume it meant they were responsible for share point, documentation, process/procedure, Six Sigma, etc. I wouldn't think that meant they retained a lot of knowledge about the site.

I don't mean to be argumentative, I promise. But CIO is far more accepted for his role (IT, back-office, process) then CKO. IF he can get the CIO tag, that's one worth getting exited about.
Click to expand...
If someone tod me they were CIO I would think... Oh, you're in charge of IT? From wiki:

Chief Information Officer (CIO) or Information Technology (IT) Director, is a job title commonly given to the most senior executive in an enterprise responsible for the information technology and computer systems that support enterprise goals.

IT covers 1 of 5 departments EG is directly in charge of. He even said he considered VP of Supply Chain but that title didn't cover everything he does.

I actually think CKO has a broader definition compared to CIO and because of that its actually a better fit. And you said you thought CKO would be in charge of process / procedure. Well he probably is in charge of those processes and procedures. I don't see EG as a flow chart guy but I bet that Knowledge of processes and procedures are Locke up in EGs head.

 
Jutz said:
Abraham said:
Jutz said:
Abraham said:
Cko? That's ridiculous and sounds made up. The point of a title is to convey (1) your level of importance and (2) what you do or control. If the next thing out of someone's mouth is "what does that mean?" When you tell then your title then it is not a title - it's a vanity exercise.

You want a C title if they approve it and it will help you for your role if people think you are an executive decision maker. Vp is good if you are under age 35 because the only people with c titles under that age are working for a small company or are the founder. If you are a c title under 35 and are neither the founder or a first 5 employee then other c's won't see you as a peer; they will see you as the nephew of the guy they really need to be talking to.

If you are over 35 and can get a c title, great. But beware: if there is an acquisition or lawsuit or 100 other things you will get pulled in to it since you are an executive.
Click to expand...
I don't think it sounds ridiculous at all... but that is purely subjective. And even though it sounds made up... it isn't. I found the description on Wikipedia. You say the point of a title is to convey level of importance. If you have a C title (as you discussed) that alone conveys your level of importance. The other part is to convey what you do or control. Well, EG has a ton of knowledge in a lot of different areas so he would be in control of that knowledge. I also greatly disagree that when people ask 'what does that mean' as being a bad thing. That would actually allow you to come up with your own answer that makes you sound more important then you acutally might be. When you do give an answer it would make it look like you are the one that is 'in the know' and there is power in that. Like you said... a C title will help your role in making people think you are an executive decision maker. It sounded to me like EG was looking for a title that would make him look good. Especially if he had to look for a job at a later date.
Click to expand...
If someone told me they were the CKO I would assume it meant they were responsible for share point, documentation, process/procedure, Six Sigma, etc. I wouldn't think that meant they retained a lot of knowledge about the site.

I don't mean to be argumentative, I promise. But CIO is far more accepted for his role (IT, back-office, process) then CKO. IF he can get the CIO tag, that's one worth getting exited about.
Click to expand...
If someone tod me they were CIO I would think... Oh, you're in charge of IT? From wiki:

Chief Information Officer (CIO) or Information Technology (IT) Director, is a job title commonly given to the most senior executive in an enterprise responsible for the information technology and computer systems that support enterprise goals.

IT covers 1 of 5 departments EG is directly in charge of. He even said he considered VP of Supply Chain but that title didn't cover everything he does.

I actually think CKO has a broader definition compared to CIO and because of that its actually a better fit. And you said you thought CKO would be in charge of process / procedure. Well he probably is in charge of those processes and procedures. I don't see EG as a flow chart guy but I bet that Knowledge of processes and procedures are Locke up in EGs head.
Click to expand...
Interesting

 
Well, if you don't like CKO then how about...

EG is the final word on what is 'metal'. And he seems to have his hands over, and strings attached to a lot of departments. And the initials of this title mean both an adverb and proper noun in the FFA. Maybe he should make his title MOP. Master of Puppets.

 
Number 2 - "Who does Number 2 work for !?!"

Sr VP of Log. Packing

Dawn. Pronounced "Don".

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
My Dad And Cancer
2 3
Replies
133
Views
3K
ZADO
ZADO
Soulfly3
The ONE sporting event/moment you'll never forgive
3 4 5
Replies
219
Views
5K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU
C
Insurance Plan Help
Replies
9
Views
213
matttyl
matttyl

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top