Why Knowledge Management Gets Cut — and How to Make It Untouchable

Here is a conversation I have heard dozens of times:

"We need to invest in knowledge management before we can scale our GenAI initiative."

"That sounds like overhead. Can't we just launch AI and figure out the content later?"

Six months later, the AI is giving wrong answers, users have lost trust and the project is being quietly shelved. The organization learns the hard way that AI without information architecture is just an expensive way to generate hallucinations.

Table of Contents

• KM Doesn’t Have a Value Problem — It Has a Messaging Problem
• The Old Framing (Why KM Gets Cut)
• The New Framing (Why KM Gets Funded)
• The Language Translation Guide: What to Say 
• The Four Strategic Positions
• The Business Case Formula
• Speaking Their Language: 7 Pitches for 7 Audiences
• The Technical Translation Guide
• The Metrics That Matter to Leadership
• 4 Rules for Communicating Results
• The Elevator Pitch Framework
• The Bottom Line

KM Doesn’t Have a Value Problem — It Has a Messaging Problem

The problem is not that executives do not value knowledge management. The problem is that KM practitioners speak the wrong language.

Gartner predicts 30% of GenAI projects will be abandoned after proof of concept by end of 2025, primarily due to poor data quality, inadequate risk controls and escalating costs — reinforcing that business value demonstration, not technical capability, determines project survival. Organizations with clear ROI frameworks at inception are significantly more likely to receive continued funding through scaling phases.

When you pitch "taxonomy" and "metadata," executives hear "cost center." When you pitch "AI accuracy" and "risk mitigation," they hear "strategic investment."

Same initiative. Different framing. Completely different outcome.

The Old Framing (Why KM Gets Cut)

Listen to how most KM initiatives are pitched:

• "We need to organize our content."
• "Let's build a taxonomy."
• "We need metadata standards."
• "Content governance is important."
• "KM will save time."

Every one of these statements is true. And every one of them sounds like overhead to an executive who is trying to hit quarterly numbers.

When budgets get tight, these initiatives get cut first. Why? Because they are framed as nice-to-haves, things that would be good to do eventually, when there's time and money, which there never is.

The positioning problem is fatal:

• "Organizing information" sounds like filing cabinets and librarians, essential but not urgent.
• "Nice-to-have" means first on the chopping block.
• "We can do this later" means never.
  

This framing has killed more KM initiatives than any technology failure ever could.

Related Article: From Siloed to Composable: Why Componentized Information Architecture Wins

The New Framing (Why KM Gets Funded)

Now listen to the same initiative positioned differently:

• "We need to make our AI accurate."
• "Let's enable cross-departmental AI use cases."
• "We need to reduce hallucinations and improve retrieval precision."
• "Governance is how we maintain AI quality at scale."
• "KM will make our $2M AI investment actually deliver ROI."

Same underlying work. Completely different executive response.

Why? Because now KM is positioned as:

• The foundation that makes AI work, not a separate initiative, but a prerequisite for AI success.
• Protection of existing investment, the $2M you have already spent on AI technology will fail without it.
• Strategic enabler, competitive advantage, not administrative overhead.
• The difference between pilot and platform, what separates successful AI from failed experiments.

This is not spinning. It is accurate. GenAI genuinely cannot succeed at enterprise scale without information architecture. Reframing makes that truth visible to people who do not live in the world of KM.

The Language Translation Guide: What to Say 

The same concepts land completely differently depending on the words you use. Here is how to translate:

Do Not Say This	Say This Instead
"We need to organize our content"	"We need to make our AI accurate"
"Let's build a taxonomy"	"Let's enable cross-departmental AI use cases"
"We need metadata"	"We need to reduce hallucinations and improve retrieval precision"
"Content governance is important"	"Governance is how we maintain AI quality at scale"
"KM will save time"	"KM will make our $2M AI investment actually deliver ROI"

Notice the pattern: The "Do Not Say This" column focuses on what KM practitioners do. The "Say This Instead" column focuses on outcomes executives care about.

Executives do not buy activities. They buy outcomes.

The Four Strategic Positions

Depending on your audience, position KM in the frame that resonates most:

Position 1: Risk Mitigation

The Pitch: "Without KM, our AI gives wrong answers, creating liability and customer dissatisfaction."

Why It Works: Risk is visceral. Legal exposure gets attention. Customer trust erosion hits revenue.

Best Audience: Legal, Risk Management, CEO, Board

Supporting Points:

• AI hallucinations create liability when customers act on incorrect information.
• Inconsistent answers erode brand trust.
• Compliance-sensitive content without governance is an audit failure waiting to happen.
• One viral screenshot of AI giving dangerous advice can cost millions in brand damage.

Position 2: Competitive Advantage

The Pitch: "Companies with strong KM get AI right 3x faster than competitors."

Why It Works: Executives think in competitive terms. Falling behind is unacceptable.

Best Audience: CEO, Strategy Team, Business Unit Leaders

Supporting Points:

• Competitors are investing in AI; the question is who gets it right first.
• First-mover advantage in AI-powered customer experience.
• Institutional knowledge becomes a moat when it is AI-accessible.
• Organizations that skip foundation work get stuck in pilot purgatory while the competitors scale AI.

Position 3: Force Multiplier

The Pitch: "KM does not just help AI; it helps every system that uses content."

Why It Works: ROI multiplies across initiatives. One investment in information architecture delivers returns across every content project.

Best Audience: CTO, CIO, Enterprise Architecture, IT Leadership

Supporting Points:

• Same content infrastructure serves search, personalization, analytics and AI.
• Metadata standards reduce integration costs across systems.
• Taxonomy becomes a shared vocabulary that reduces cross-system friction.
• Investment amortizes across every content-dependent initiative.

Position 4: Employee Empowerment

The Pitch: "KM makes it possible for employees to find answers in seconds, not hours."

Why It Works: Productivity is tangible. Time savings translate to dollars.

Best Audience: HR, Department Heads, Operations Leaders

Learning Opportunities

Webinar

Feb

25

Content Strategy Leaders Live: Scaling for Speed, Complexity and AI in High Tech

A candid roundtable on how high-tech leaders are rethinking content at scale.

Register

Webinar

Feb

26

Do More with Less: Modernizing the Cloud Contact Center for 2026

Learn how to leverage cloud platforms without adding a single hire to personalize every customer interaction.

Register

Webinar

Mar

25

Content Leaders Collective: Navigating Content Decisions at Scale

Discover how content leaders are modernizing content operations, avoiding costly missteps and preparing for scale and AI.

Register

Webinar

On demand

Cut the Noise: Deploying AI That Actually Moves the Needle

Learn how to turn AI experimentation into concrete revenue operations.

Watch Now

Webinar

On demand

Ditch the Desk Phones: How Modern Teams Drive AI-First Communications

Find out how one team finally pulled the plug on a legacy phone system. And built something smarter.

Watch Now

Webinar

On demand

Rebrand. Migrate. Optimize. How to Do It All (Without Slowing Down)

Cresta leveled up site speed, design flexibility and marketer sanity (in record time). Find out how.

Watch Now

Webinar

Feb

25

Content Strategy Leaders Live: Scaling for Speed, Complexity and AI in High Tech

A candid roundtable on how high-tech leaders are rethinking content at scale.

Register

Webinar

Feb

26

Do More with Less: Modernizing the Cloud Contact Center for 2026

Learn how to leverage cloud platforms without adding a single hire to personalize every customer interaction.

Register

Webinar

Mar

25

Content Leaders Collective: Navigating Content Decisions at Scale

Discover how content leaders are modernizing content operations, avoiding costly missteps and preparing for scale and AI.

Register

View all

Supporting Points:

• Knowledge workers spend 20-30% of their time searching for information.
• New hire ramp time decreases when knowledge is accessible.
• Experts get fewer interruptions when AI answers routine questions.
• Employee satisfaction improves when tools work.

The Business Case Formula

Executives think in numbers. Give them numbers.

The Cost of NOT Having KM

Calculate these for your organization:

Employee Time Wasted Searching:

• Average knowledge worker spends 2+ hours daily searching for information.
• 500 employees × 2 hours × $50/hour × 250 days = $12.5M annually.
• Even if you capture 20% of that, it is $2.5M.

Support Tickets That Could Be Self-Service:

• If 40% of support tickets are answerable by AI with relevant content.
• 50,000 tickets/year × 40% × $15/ticket = $300K annually.

Sales Deals Delayed by Lack of Information:

• Sales reps spend 6 hours/week searching for competitive intel, case studies, specs.
• If better access accelerates 10% of deals by one week.
• Revenue impact: Calculate based on your pipeline and deal velocity.

AI Investment at Risk:

• You have already invested $X million in AI technology.
• Without content infrastructure, that investment fails.
• KM investment protects and enables existing AI spend.

The Investment Required

Be specific about costs:

• Content operations team: $X (headcount × loaded cost).
• Taxonomy and metadata design: $X (consulting + internal effort).
• AI-assisted enrichment tools: $X (technology licensing).
• Total investment: $X.

The ROI Calculation

Conservative scenario: 5:1 ROI in first year

• $500K investment yields $2.5M in productivity gains and cost savings.

Moderate scenario: 7:1 ROI in first year

• Same investment yields $3.5M when you include AI project success and risk mitigation.

Aggressive scenario: 10:1 ROI in first year

• When you factor in competitive advantage and revenue acceleration.

Pick the scenario you can defend with your organization's specific numbers.

Related Article: The 5-Level Content Operations Maturity Model: Where Are You on the Path to AI-Ready?

Speaking Their Language: 7 Pitches for 7 Audiences

The same initiative needs different pitches for different stakeholders. Here is how to tailor your message:

To the CEO

Focus: Strategic impact, competitive advantage, transformation

The Pitch: "Our GenAI initiative is not just about technology; it is about making our institutional knowledge a strategic asset. Companies that get this right see 3x faster employee onboarding, 40% fewer support tickets and measurably faster innovation cycles. We are investing in a foundation that will make all our future AI investments succeed."

Key Words: Strategic, competitive advantage, transformation, ROI, risk mitigation

To the CFO

Focus: ROI, cost savings, budget efficiency

The Pitch: "Our current state costs us $2.3M annually in wasted employee time searching for information. With a $400K investment in knowledge management infrastructure, we will save $1.2M in year one through support deflection and productivity gains. That is a conservative 3:1 ROI estimate. Plus, we protect the $2M we have already invested in AI technology."

Key Words: ROI, cost savings, payback period, efficiency, budget protection

To the CTO/CIO

Focus: Architecture, scalability, integration

The Pitch: "GenAI is exposing the cracks in our content infrastructure. Right now, we have 15 different systems with overlapping data, no consistent taxonomy and no governance. If we do not fix the foundation, every AI project we build will hit the same scaling wall. This is not just a KM project; it is essential enterprise architecture."

Key Words: Architecture, integration, scalability, technical debt, infrastructure

To Legal/Compliance

Focus: Risk management, accuracy, auditability

The Pitch: "Without proper governance, AI will give customers wrong answers and create legal liability. With it, we have traceability: every answer's source, approver and review date. This turns AI from a risk into a controlled, auditable system."

Key Words: Risk mitigation, compliance, auditability, governance, liability

To Department Heads (Sales, Support, HR)

Focus: Solving their pain points, making their teams more effective

Sales Pitch: "Your reps spend 6 hours a week searching for competitive intel, case studies and product specs. With AI-powered knowledge management, they find that information in seconds, meaning more time selling, faster deal cycles and higher win rates."

Support Pitch: "Your agents handle 200 tickets a day, and 60% are repetitive questions. With GenAI trained on well-organized knowledge, we can deflect 40% of those tickets to self-service, letting your team focus on the complex issues that really need human expertise."

Key Words: Productivity, time savings, job satisfaction, focus on high-value work

To Content Owners (SMEs)

Focus: Making their lives easier, not harder

The Pitch: "Right now, your expertise is locked in your head or scattered across 50 documents. AI can help you turn that expertise into reusable content that automatically answers questions, reduces repetitive requests and lets you focus on strategic work. Plus, we will use AI to do the heavy lifting on tagging and organizing."

Key Words: Leverage your expertise, reduce repetitive work, AI-assisted (not manual), reusability

To End Users

Focus: Simplicity, speed, ease of use

The Pitch: "Tired of spending 30 minutes trying to find the right policy document or digging through SharePoint for that customer case study? Our new AI assistant gives you answers in seconds, ask questions like you would a colleague."

Key Words: Fast, easy, simple, conversational, helpful

The Technical Translation Guide

Translate technical terms for each audience based on what they care about. The table below shows how different audiences interpret the same terms:

Technical Term	What Legal Hears	What Finance Hears	What Business Hears
Metadata	Auditability, traceability	Cost of manual tagging	Findability
Taxonomy	Controlled terminology	Reduced redundancy	Easier navigation
Governance	Risk management	Budget control	Quality assurance
Content Ops	Compliance workflows	Operational efficiency	Keeping info current
RAG	"Where does this answer come from?"	"Why does this cost money?"	"Will it work?"

Use their vocabulary, not yours.

The Metrics That Matter to Leadership

Different audiences need different metrics. Here is what to report to whom:

Tier 1: Business Outcome Metrics (CEO View)

This is what gets the budget approved and renewed.

Revenue Impact:

• Faster sales cycles (days saved per deal)
• Higher win rates (% increase with better competitive intel)
• Upsell/cross-sell enabled (opportunities identified by AI)

Cost Savings:

• Support ticket deflection (% handled by AI vs. human agent)
• Reduced training time (hours saved for new hires)
• Operational efficiency (hours saved searching for information)

Strategic Impact:

• Time-to-market (faster product launches with better knowledge sharing)
• Innovation velocity (ideas to execution, enabled by knowledge access)
• Employee satisfaction (retention, engagement scores)

Tier 2: Operational Metrics (VP/Director View)

This proves you are managing well.

Adoption: Daily active users, queries per user, return rate

Quality: Answer accuracy, retrieval precision and hallucination rate

Content Health: Coverage, freshness, metadata completeness

Tier 3: Technical Metrics (Manager View)

This tells you if the system is healthy.

Performance: Response time, uptime, query success rate 

Content Operations: Documents processed, metadata quality, owner engagement

4 Rules for Communicating Results

Rule #1: Lead With Business Outcomes, Not Technical Metrics

Rather than “Our retrieval precision improved from 73% to 81%.”

Say instead: “Employees now find the correct answer 2x faster.”

Rule #2: Use Comparisons, Not Absolute Numbers

Rather than “We deflected 1,247 tickets.”

Say instead: “We deflected 23% more tickets than last quarter.”

Rule #3: Tell Stories with Your Numbers

Rather than “User satisfaction: 4.2/5.0”

Say instead: “User satisfaction: 4.2/5.0, here is what users are saying: 'This saved me 30 minutes today.'”

Rule #4: Be Honest About What's Not Working

Rather than “Everything is great! ”

Say instead: “Accuracy in Product A is 89% (good), but Product B is 62% (we are fixing it). ”

Credibility comes from honesty, not spinning.

The Elevator Pitch Framework

You have two minutes with a key stakeholder. Here is the structure:

• HOOK (15 seconds): Start with their pain point. "I know you're concerned about [their top issue]..."

• PROBLEM (30 seconds): Show the cost of the status quo. "Right now, [current state] is costing us [specific impact]..."

• SOLUTION (45 seconds): Your initiative is the answer. "With [your initiative], we can [specific benefit]..."

• PROOF (30 seconds): Evidence it works. "We've seen [early results/industry data]..."

• ASK (15 seconds): Clear next step. "I'd like to [specific request]..."

Example: CFO Pitch

"I know you are looking at our $2M AI investment and wondering when we will see ROI. Here is the challenge: right now, our employees spend an average of 2 hours per day searching for information across our 500-person company. That is $12.5M in wasted productivity annually. Plus, our support team handles 60% of repetitive questions that could be managed through self-service, costing another $800K.

With a $400K investment in knowledge management infrastructure, structured content, metadata and governance, we can cut those costs by 50% in year one. That is a 3:1 return, a conservative estimate, and it protects the AI investment we have made by ensuring it works at scale.

I would like 30 minutes next week to walk you through the detailed ROI model and implementation timeline.

Two minutes. Clear problem, clear solution, clear ask.

Case Study: Reframing Success

A knowledge management director at a Fortune 100 technology company had proposed taxonomy and metadata initiatives three times over five years. Each time, the project was deprioritized in favor of "more strategic" investments.

In year six, the company launched a GenAI initiative. The KM director reframed the exact same work:

Before (rejected): "We need to invest $400K in taxonomy development and metadata standards to improve content organization."

After (approved): "Our $3M GenAI investment is at risk of failure without content infrastructure. A $400K investment in AI-enabling architecture will improve retrieval accuracy by 40% and protect our AI investment."

The proposal was approved within two weeks. The work was identical. The framing made it strategic rather than operational.

Result: The GenAI initiative achieved 89% accuracy (vs. 62% industry average for comparable deployments). The CDO credited "content readiness" as the primary differentiator.

Related Article: Stop Using AI to Hide Your Broken Processes

The Bottom Line

Knowledge management has a branding problem, not a value problem.

The knowledge management work is essential. The outcomes are real. The ROI is measurable. But if you position KM as "organizing content," you will lose to every initiative that sounds more strategic, even if those initiatives depend on KM to succeed.

Reframing the value of knowledge management is not manipulation. It is about accuracy.

GenAI genuinely does not scale without an information architecture. AI accuracy genuinely depends on metadata. Enterprise AI genuinely fails without content governance. Saying so is not a spin; it is the truth that executives need to hear in the language they understand.

Stop pitching taxonomy. Start pitching AI accuracy.

Stop pitching metadata. Start pitching risk mitigation.

Stop pitching content governance. Start pitching the ROI on your AI investment.

Same work. Different frame. Budget approved.

Learn how you can join our contributor community.