Realistically, the way we do it is we have a team of supervisors who have been around long enough and have seen everything that - as a group - we are the instit

Realistically, the way we do it is we have a team of supervisors who have been around long enough and have seen everything that - as a group - we are the institutional knowledge. We are pretty effective at communicating with each other to bring the institutional knowledge to bear on a problem - we could be better at training our subordinates so that they have access to this institutional knowledge, but the truth is that the training is expensive and not usually well received. Generally, I don't think efforts to accumulate institutional knowledge on a website work bear fruit - no one really wants to update the website, both because it's thankless, but also because of access time. It is much faster to tap the institutional knowledge in management by sending an email than by paging through the results of a search. For written institutional knowledge to have real value, the access time has to be small, which means someone has taken real care in curating the knowledge so it's easily accessed. Finally, we have the Brian problem. Brian was the person most likely to update our internal websites - unfortunately Brian wasn't very good and had some poor ideas regarding lessons learned - by adding them to the websites, his bad ideas were passed on to younger team members who didn't know better.