KM Strategy Document - Tripod

magazinebindΔιαχείριση

6 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 7 μήνες)

55 εμφανίσεις


1







Prelude to a Strategy

Mov
ing knowledge sharing from the sandlot to the playing fields






Version 1

Date 08th August, 2001

By, Gaurav Chadha

Knowledge Space

Creating | sharing | applying




2

A tentative path




A.

The business value of knowledge management

B.

What is Knowledge Management (KM)?

C.

Forms of knowledge

D.

Three

essential components of knowledge management

E.

Implementing Knowledge Management



PHASE 1:
building internal focus


OBJE
CTIVE 1

Become a learning organization

ISSUE 1: Problem Solving

ISSUE 2: Managing to learn


OBJECTIVE 2

Build the practice of sharing knowledge and learning


OBJECTIVE 3

Empower communities of practice



PHASE 2:
creating mission
-
critical awareness


OBJEC
TIVE 1

Linking Knowledge to Business Strategy


OBJECTIVE 2

Linking knowledge to work process


OBJECTIVE 3

Linking knowledge to culture


OBJECTIVE 4

Linking knowledge to behavior


OBJECTIVE 5

Linking knowledge to business environment


PHASE 3:
maturing and
continuous improvement


OBJECTIVE

Sustain, study and modify the system for optimum performance.


PHASE 4:
building external focus


OBJECTIVE

Be capable of building stand
-
alone/ web
-
based knowledge/ learning/ content management products
or provide knowle
dge (explicit and tacit) centric solutions to our clients.



3

A. The business value of knowledge management




Improve the flow of information and knowledge across operating units.



Improve competitive response or identify new opportunities faster.



To reduce

operating costs, or to operate more efficiently as a global organization.



To accelerate the rate of innovation and/ or reduce cycle times.



To reduce loss of intellectual assets due to employee turnover



To improve customer retention


B.

What is Knowledge
Management (KM)?

Viewing knowledge management in terms of strategic business goals,
Knowledge
Management is a discipline used to systematically leverage expertise and information to
improve organizational efficiency, responsiveness, competency, and innovat
ion.
Systematically means that the discipline does not rely on just water cooler conversations, but
on planned processes, technology, and behaviors. Knowledge management leverages all the
key resources that a company has already and that can be put to use
in a more effective way.


Knowledge management improves organizational:

1.

Responsiveness:

Marshall resources to respond to unanticipated events.

2.

Innovation:
Bring people together across time and geography to share ideas.

3.

Competency: M
anage knowledge transfe
r to improve employee skills.

4.

Efficiency:
Re
-
use captured Intellectual Assets.


Knowledge Management accomplishes these by enhancing the connections between:

1.

People
:

Are those who have the experience and expertise your organization
depends on.


2.

Places
:

A
re where those people come together, physically and virtually, to
collaborate.

3.

Things:
Is the knowledge they share: the information, content, processes and
lessons of life.


C. Forms of knowledge

Every business swims in a “sea of potential” comprised of
two forms of knowledge, which are
notoriously difficult to utilize.



Its
‘write only memory’
, consisting of all the data it has collected and recorded.



The unleashed ‘
tacit knowledge and experience’

carried in the minds of its
employees.

“Crossing the K
-
lin
e” (that is, deploying high
-
value KM solutions) enables traditional
businesses to leverage this sea of potential knowledge more completely, to achieve concrete
business goals. The ultimate benefit of KM for traditional businesses is nothing less than the
a
bility to turn tables on nontraditional competitors by becoming an “enlightened” generator
of nuggets of insight
-
that is, create new knowledge.


With technology on the trend of becoming a commodity, the key enterprise resources are
people and information.
Experts and practitioners have important company relevant
knowledge in their heads
-

tacit knowledge
-

that could spark important insights in their
coworkers if it would be available to them in some way. Information is a source for good
decision
-
making, bu
t a piece of information is more effective when presented in a
context
,
that is, together with other pieces of related information that make the original information
more meaningful and actionable. (For instance, a sales quarterly report by branch may
prov
ide important information, but it is much more meaningful and actionable when analyzed
in conjunction with the company's operating plan and the industry trends for this year).



4

Companies that "don't know what they know" are bound to "reinvent the wheel" m
any times.
This way of operating is not very efficient. Knowledge Management can improve corporate
efficiency by providing a framework and tools and techniques to reuse captured intellectual
assets. By marshaling resources to respond to opportunities and t
hreats, the company's
responsiveness could be vastly improved. And by bringing people together across time and
geography to share ideas, innovation can flourish faster and bear richer fruits.


D.
Three

essential components of knowledge management are:


1.

Knowledge Discovery
,

2.

Knowledge Organization
,
and

3.

Knowledge Sharing



We discover knowledge where it is: in the heads of people, in workflow diagrams and
procedure manuals. We organize the knowledge according to the company's preferred
classification sche
ma or taxonomy, and we share the knowledge among those employees that
are authorized to know about it, and can benefit from its availability.


E.
Implementing Knowledge Management

The discovery, organization, and sharing of knowledge be accomplished by l
everaging current
enterprise initiatives and disciplines. Starting with the wealth of data and information
currently available we can leverage our tacit and explicit knowledge by building knowledge
management solutions on top of five key pillars, namely:
B
usiness Intelligence,
Knowledge Discovery and Mapping, Expertise Location, Collaboration, and
Knowledge Transfer
.


Five key pillars for building a

knowledge management are:


1.

Business Intelligence (BI)

is the term that describes the processes that together

are used to enable improved decision
-
making. BI includes data mining and
warehousing, OLAP, and other advanced technologies that can be used for gleaning
valuable insights from the stored data.


2.

Knowledge Discovery

includes search tools, data navigation
capabilities, text
-
mining techniques that enable knowledge discovery from various sources, and
Knowledge Mapping i
ncludes content classification tools and document
management tools, is the technique for representing knowledge sources (people and
informatio
n) in a context defined by their relationships.


3.

Expertise Location,

encompassing expert networks, visual affinity identification,
finding, cataloging, and making available the best expertise available in the
corporation when needed for business decision
-
making.


4.

Collaboration,
embodied by groupware products, but also including synchronous
messaging (i.e., the telephone) and asynchronous messaging (e
-
mail) technologies,
enables people to share their information, expertise, and insights, which results in a
n
amplification of tacit knowledge which results in enhanced innovation and
motivation.


5.

Knowledge Transfer
, including computer
-
based training, distributed learning and
live classes, seminars and discussions, extends the reach of the available knowledge
a
nd skill transfer resources to remote location, enabling virtual teams to perform at
the high
-
level organization standards, independently of the geographical location of
team members.




5

I think today we are the first generation

In human history where kno
wledge is going to

be obsolete, not just once during our careers

but several times.


. Dr. Arno Penzias,

Bell Labs


PHASE 1:
building internal focus



OBJECTIVE 1

Become a learning organization


ISSUE 1: Problem Solving


“Problems occur frequently in orga
nizations; these problems can be visible symptoms of faulty procedures or
processes, which, if changed, could result in organizational improvement, particularly when they emerge repeatedly
in the day
-
to
-
day operational activities through which an organizat
ion produces and delivers products and services to
customers.”


Why our organization isn't learning all it should. A dominant pattern of problem solving
behavior is observed; this pattern

characterized by overcoming immediate obstacles and
ignoring opportu
nities for change and learning

provides an unexplored source of resistance
to change. This may reduce our ability to detect underlying causes of recurring problems and
thus take corrective action. The result? Molehills can quickly turn into mountains.


Pr
oblem solving makes a distinction between
fixing problems

(first
-
order solutions) and
diagnosing and altering root causes

to prevent recurrence

(second
-
order solutions).
First
-
order problem solving allows work to continue but does nothing to prevent a simi
lar
problem from occurring. People exhibit first
-
order problem solving when they do not expend
any more energy on a problem after obtaining the missing input needed to complete a task.
Second
-
order problem solving, in contrast, investigates and seeks to ch
ange underlying causes
of a problem.


First
-
order problem solving comprised of two heuristics, or rules of thumb, that are
embedded in our work system:


Heuristic #1

"Just get the work done, do what it takes to complete the product," this behavior is
chara
cterized by a concern for securing the information or material they need to do the
immediate work and not on understanding what caused the problem to occur. After the work
is completed, no further effort is spent on the problem, including communicating tha
t it
occurred.


Heuristic #2

"Get help from your friends," is characterized by choosing to ask for help from people who are
friends rather than from those who are experts or are best equipped to correct the problem.


6


Factors that reinforce the tendency to

engage in short
-
term fixes
and thereby limit our learning from front
-
line failures.

1.

A lack of available time and norms that valued quick, self
-
sufficient solutions to
problems contributed to a pattern of project team members rarely engaging in root
cause
removal. When they did, it was usually only to communicate that they had
experienced a problem. Therefore, only a small percentage of the problems
encountered were revealed to others within the organization, dramatically reducing
the potential for organiza
tional learning and improvement.


2.

In addition, when communication occurred, the significance of the problem was often
ignored or downplayed by the receiver, resulting in further missed opportunities for
investigation into the root cause of the disturbance
.


3.

These small front
-
line problems collectively frustrate project teams and senior
management, and hinder the team member’s ability to perform effectively, but when
taken out of context and viewed individually, appear trivial. Thus, system aberrations
tha
t are often dismissed as being "simple to solve" often persist because of a cycle of
inactivity.


So what are the necessary conditions for enabling organizational
learning in the teams?

1.

If team members are to engage in root cause removal, this activity mu
st be an explicit
part of their job and enough time allocated for improvement efforts.


2.

There need to be frequent opportunities for communicating about problems with
individuals who are responsible for supplying team members with materials or
information.
It is observed that team members surface problems with others when
they are able to communicate easily. Encouraging people to communicate and
creating a psychologically safe environment is not sufficient. There must be
convenient opportunities in the cours
e of the day for people to give feedback.


3.

When the signal is given that there is a problem, proper attention must be paid to it.
We must recognize communication about problems as a valid step in the direction of
improvement. Often the best that people co
uld do is to merely raise the issue, but too
often these person run the risk of being considered a "complainer." There aren’t many
instances where people contacted someone about a trivial or insignificant problem. In
fact, there are several occasions where

surprisingly people did not raise awareness
around a problem that could have serious consequences to a project or TIS
environment.


4.

Once the other conditions are in place, we can begin to encourage solution generation,
experimentation, and consideration
of the longer
-
term consequences of actions.


5.


Publicizing successful system problem solving will further encourage people to
recognize the potential benefits of engaging in this kind of "extra" work.



7

ISSUE 2: Managing to learn


Few firms know how to chan
nel innovative thinking into practice by making sense of the overwhelming amount of
data available and then sharing discoveries and strategies with other members of the organization. In short, they
don't know how to create organizations that keep learning.


Firms that come up short in this regard, may be condemned to repeat mistakes endlessly, fail to adapt to changing
conditions, lose employees who are repositories of important knowledge and skills, and ultimately perish. In contrast,
a learning organizati
on is one that is "skilled at creating, acquiring, interpreting, transferring, and retaining
knowledge and at purposefully modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights." Although new ideas are
essential, lots of light bulb epiphanies alone
do not a learning organization make. The necessary complement is a
mind
-
set of inquiry and experimentation, plus a knowledge
-
sharing process that enables everyone in a company to
act in an informed way upon what's been learned before.


We need to build a g
uide to transform ourselves into a learning organization, a path that
requires the willingness to change routines and not bow down before conventional wisdom.


There are three steps needed for learning to occur, no matter what
learning style is used.

1.

We m
ust first acquire information, The crucial questions include,

a.

What information should we collect?

b.

From where?

c.

How should it be obtained and

d.

By whom?

2.

Next, we
interpret

information. At this point, the crucial questions include,

a.

What does the information

mean?

b.

What categories should we apply?

c.

What cause
-
and
-
effect relationships are at work?

3.

Finally, we
use

or
apply

information, translating it into action."


Most companies commonly take the first step, but the next two are more difficult and more
rarely
done. We need to take a careful look at what we need to know to meet our challenges
and leverage our opportunities, and then figure out how to go about learning it.


A frequent stumbling block is the occurrence of learning
disabilities, which slow down the

learning process at every stage.

1.

Problems in acquiring knowledge arise from oversights, omissions, and errors in the
way information is collected,

2.

Interpretation problems arise from distortions in the way information is collected, as
well as from poor sta
tistical methods.

3.

Application and use problems arise from corporate risk aversion and the difficulties
people have in recognizing that their actual behavior often deviates markedly from
their espoused behavior.



Together, these problems conspire to underm
ine learning and reduce its effectiveness."


In the long run, a learning organization doesn't rely on old answers to new problems but
stimulates each generation of employees to collect and examine new data and come up with
new approaches. After all, "learn
ing is a profession of faith in the future, an admission that
progress is possible."




8

OBJECTIVE 2

Build the practice of sharing knowledge and learning



Pervading the idea of knowledge sharing are three myths.


Myth1. Build it and they will come,

Myth2.

Technology can replace face
-
to
-
face,

Myth3. And first you have to create a learning culture.


Myth1. Build it and they will come


Managers who want to make the knowledge in their organizations more available often have a mental image of a large
warehou
se that contains all of that knowledge. They envision those who are looking for knowledge going to the
warehouse and taking out what they need. The idea has a lot of intuitive appeal. Knowledge seems so amorphous that
the notion of its being documented and

located in a central place offers a comforting sense of control and
manageability.




The first thing most organizations do is building a central electronic database, a perfect fit for the warehouse image.
But, to their dismay, having spent a considerabl
e amount of money to create the database, very little happens: neither
contributions nor retrievals occur with much enthusiasm. Such experiences are a disappointing outcome to a very
well intentioned idea.


When organizations find that their members show l
ittle interest in the database, they often backtrack in an attempt to
"fix" the lack of contributions. The thinking is that an incentive system is needed to reward people for contributing
and retrieving knowledge. Incentives have become a fairly familiar s
econd step in knowledge management scenarios.
The types of rewards offered have varied from the mundane to the ridiculous

a Dove bar for each time you go into
the database, 500 frequent flyer points for every submission.

Although incentives work to som
e extent, none of them delivers the hoped
-
for results.
The answer lies not in
better incentives but in altering that powerful originating image of the warehouse. That image places
the focus on collecting and storing knowledge instead of on reusing it, whic
h is the ultimate goal.
This starting image needs to be transformed into one that focuses on reuse
.


Myth2. Technology can replace face
-
to
-
face,




















Myth3. And first you have to create a learning culture.




















Common Know
ledge: How Companies Thrive

by Sharing What They Know, by Nancy M. Dixon


Ford supplies an illustration of this point. Every Ford plant is
responsible for making a 5 percent productivity increase every year.
People in the plants refer to it as the "task." T
his is serious business;
as one plant manager said, "If you don't make your task, your
successor will." Year after year it is a real chore to keep making the
5 percent task, and production engineers are stretched to find some
new process or technique to re
duce the cost of labor, materials, or
energy. Now, the Best Practice Replication process sends the
production engineer in each Vehicle Operations plant five to eight
best practices items a week, each of which describes how a sister
plant reduced costs. Eac
h item spells out exactly how much was
saved, specified in hours, materials, or energy. The production
engineers have come to rely on this system as a way to make their
task. In fact, on average, 40 percent of task comes from best
practices pulled off the
system

and in some plants 100 percent of
task is taken from the system. It is significant that this system is so
well used in an industry that is known for being highly competitive.
People use it because the system offers help with a very critical
business

need. But what has also happened at Ford as a result of
this ongoing exchange is a change in the company's culture. A
learning culture is developing based on this experiential
understanding of why knowledge sharing is important.

"
Our organization has a very competitiv
e culture, so no one is
going to tell anyone else something that might help the other
person get ahead." The third myth, based on beliefs such as this,
is that the exchange of knowledge happens only in organizations
that have a noncompetitive or a collabor
ative culture. It follows
that the first thing you have to do is to fix the culture and then
get people to share. But I have found that it's the other way
around. If people begin sharing ideas about issues they see as
really important, the sharing itself c
reates a learning culture.


It is a kind of chicken
-
or
-
egg issue: Which comes first, the
learning culture or the exchange of knowledge? Given many
organizations' rather abysmal success rate at changing their
culture, I would put my money on having the exch
ange impact
the culture rather than waiting for the culture to change.”

E&Y is a case in point. The firm has a very sophisticated Knowledge
Web that holds some 350,000 items and has up to 3,000 hits a day.
But a

vast system of face
-
to
-
face interaction encourages and
supports this technology system. Twenty
-
two networks of
consultants work in particular industries or on particular solutions
(e.g., managed care, manufacturing, supply chain operations, new
product de
velopment). The networks hold frequent face
-
to
-
face
meetings to learn from each other and to build the relationships
that support the Knowledge Web. And as at Ford, a surge in
submissions as well as hits on the system always follows a network
meeting. Rece
ntly, E&Y has moved even farther into the face
-
to
-
face realm by "hard
-
tagging" certain expert consultants in each
network to travel around as full
-
time collectors and disseminators
of the knowledge for that network.

If groups of people who do the same kind of work are brought
together, they will begin to share knowledge (although we often
think of this as telling "war s
tories"). That has always been one
of the great side benefits of training programs or of attending
conferences. But getting people together is costly, because it
involves travel and time away from the job

expenses that in this
time of cost cutting seem ext
ravagant.


One of the great promises that technology holds is that it can
allow people to share knowledge without having to be in the
same place. Although this sounds reasonable, it unfortunately
just doesn't always work out that way.


Technology has to be

married with face
-
to
-
face interaction to
create the most effective systems; one does not replace the other,
although clearly one can greatly enhance the other.


9



Knowledge process



Understanding the way people work and knowledge enabling the people through
processes.

Knowledge map

1.

What we know and who knows it

2.

Experts and their domains of kn
owledge

3.

Knowledge flow and inefficiencies

4.

Knowledge assets


Knowledge gap



What we don’t know

Measurement and analysis





Knowledge sharing



Outline a knowledge sharing vision and strategy



Access knowledge sharing readiness



What knowledge to share: Identi
fy areas in which knowledge sharing will produce
measurable impact on their core business metrics e.g. know how, knowledge of
clients, competitive intelligence, knowledge of process.


Knowledge sharing methodology

1.

How can knowledge sharing reduce our cost
s?

2.

How can knowledge sharing expedite time
-
to
-
market and improve the quality of
output?

3.

What audience (internal: employees/ external: clients, customers etc.) or
departments or divisions should share knowledge?

4.

What are the knowledge flow problems, and wha
t opportunities are associated with
finding solutions?

5.

What are the obstacles to a successful implementation, and what are the strategies to
over come them?






10

OBJECTIVE 3

Empower communities of practice


“People, not facts are the focal point of KM. To

create and to act on knowledge, people need places to meet and a way
to manage the data, information, processes they find or create.”

Lotus and IBM, KM Products


What are communities of practice?

In brief, they’re groups of people informally bound
togethe
r by shared expertise and passion for joint enterprise. They acknowledge and celebrate
the power of informal communities of peers, their creativity and resourcefulness in solving
problems, and inventing better, easier ways to meet their commitments. Some c
ommunities of
practice meet regularly; others may be connected primarily by a shared network space. A
community of practice may or may not have an explicit agenda on a given week, and even if it
does, it may not follow the agenda closely. Inevitably, howev
er people in communities of
practice share their experiences and knowledge in free
-
flowing, creative ways that foster new
approaches to problems.


Because its primary “output”

knowledge


is intangible, the community of practice might
sound like another “
soft” management fad. But that’s not the case.


There are three reasons why they aren’t more prevalent.

1.

Even though the communities of practice have been around for a long time (for
centuries), the term has just recently entered the business vernacular.

2.

Only several dozen forward
-
thinking companies have taken the leap of “installing”
them and nurturing them.

3.

It’s not particularly easy to build and sustain communities of practice or to integrate
them with the rest of an organization. The organic, spontaneo
us, and informal nature
of communities of practice makes them resistant to supervision and interference.



A snapshot comparison

Communities of practice, formal work groups, teams, and informal networks are useful in complementary ways. Below is a
summary

of their characteristics.


What’s the
purpose?

Who belongs?

What hold it
together?

How long does
it last?

Community
of practice


To develop member’s
capabilities; to build and
exchange knowledge

Members who select
themselves

Passion, commitment,
and ide
ntification with
the group’s expertise


As long as there is
interest in
maintaining the
group


Formal work
group

To deliver a product or
service

Everyone who report’s
to the group’s manager

Job requirements and
common goals

Until the next
reorganization

Project team

To accomplish a task

Employees assigned by
senior management

The project’s milestones
and goals

Until the project
has been completed

Informal
network

To collect and pass on
business information

Friends and business
acquaintances

Mutual needs

As long as people
have a reason to
connect


11

Why should we pay attention to our communities of practice?

Core competencies don’t reside in abstractions of theories. In the real world organizations
they reside and grow in communities of practice.


Communiti
es of practice and their networks can help us

1.

Organize work in ways that make people grow and be happy

2.

Accelerate business cycles

3.

Learn faster than the competition


Communities of practice deliver their value proposition by,

1.

Developing and spreading better

practices faster

2.

Connecting “islands of knowledge” into self organizing, knowledge sharing networks
of professional communities

3.

Feeding and being fed by web
-
based repositories of both proven solutions and new
approaches

4.

Fostering cross
-
functional and cros
s
-
divisional collaboration

5.

Increasing your member’s ability to initiate and contribute to projects across
organizational boundaries.





12

A man has no ears for that which experience

Has given him no access






. Friedrich Nitzsche,

Sayings


PHASE 2:
creati
ng mission
-
critical awareness



OBJECTIVE 1

Linking Knowledge to Business Strategy















OBJECTIVE 2

Linking knowledge to work process


As the KM movement continues to evolve, it's clear that real success won't come from simply
grafting knowledg
e activities onto existing work processes. Everyone today is already too
busy; we don't have time to add knowledge management on top of our jobs. Expecting
knowledge workers to peruse repositories of lessons and experiences in their spare time, or to
share

their own learning at leisure, is highly unrealistic. Therefore, the knowledge
management process has to be "baked" into key knowledge work processes. How we create,
gather, store, share, and apply knowledge must blend well with how market researchers,
sc
ientists, consultants, engineers, and managers work on a daily basis.


1.

Redesign the knowledge work processes

One measure that holds promise is to redesign the knowledge work processes from
scratch, or at least to fine
-
tune them incrementally by examining h
ow they might
better channel the flow of knowledge. While knowledge workers may view their work
in unstructured terms, it is possible to view knowledge work as a somewhat
structured process that can be designed and improved.


Knowledge work processes have
not been commonly addressed in business
-
process
reengineering or quality programs; administrative or operational processes have
tended to be the primary focus of those movements. It is perhaps just as well that this
has been the case, because top
-
down reen
gineering of knowledge work is not likely to
be successful. Knowledge workers care too much about their autonomy and initiative
to be handed process designs created by someone else. The emphasis in knowledge
work
-
process redesign should rather be on partic
ipation by the relevant knowledge
workers and on longer
-
term observation by designers, so that invisible knowledge
activities can be understood and put in context. Knowledge work
-
process designers
should also focus on eliminating non
-
value
-
adding activity;

otherwise, knowledge
workers will not have time to perform desired knowledge management activities. This
is also a useful way of demonstrating the value of knowledge process redesign to
knowledge workers.


This is the approach taken by James Wolfensohn at the World Bank.
Shortly after his appointment as CEO, Wolfensohn announced in 1996
that the bank's mission, previously predicated on lending money to
developing nations, would shift. Henceforth the b
ank would become "the
knowledge bank" and would dispense development
-
oriented knowledge
on the same level of importance as the money it loaned. For the last
several years the World Bank has been putting in place the underlying
strategies, processes, and be
haviors to make "the knowledge bank" a
reality.



For the most mature knowledge
-
managing
organizations today, the challenge that lies ahead is
f
orging this link between knowledge management
and fundamental business

strategy.


The most viable model may be to make knowledge
the product. Existing products and services can be
redefined as knowledge assets, or augmented with
knowledge of how they are
used.


13

2.

Build explicit linkages between knowledge manage
ment and the
knowledge work process

Another important step is to build explicit linkages between knowledge management
and the knowledge work process it is designed to support. The linkages must specify
how knowledge should be imported to and exported from
the process, when and how
in the process this knowledge should be used, and what difference it should make in
the outcome. Such linkages might take several forms (all of which happen to start
with "p"), including:


a.

People whose job it is to transfer knowle
dge to and from front
-
line knowledge
work processes at the core of the organization.

b.

Project management approaches that at each phase of a process review what
has been learned and what needs to be learned next.

c.

Prototypes of knowledge work processes in whi
ch knowledge creation and use
is maximized as a design objective.

d.

Process designs that specify how knowledge is to be used at different points in
the flow of work Programming in computers that automatically supply the
right form of knowledge.


OBJECTIVE 3

Linking knowledge to culture

Many important questions remain about how an organization can best create a culture that
values the creation, sharing, and use of knowledge. Naturally, bringing about a change of this
scope is a long
-
term, multifaceted undertak
ing.


Some measures that hold promise aren't difficult to understand, as we see them in such
knowledge
-
oriented institutions as universities and research institutes. They include:


1.

Recognizing people in part on the basis of their knowledge contributions.

2.

Senior executives set an example of knowledge behaviors (by, among other things,
reading books and talking about them!)

3.

Evaluating decisions and decision
-
making on the basis of the knowledge used to
arrive at them

4.

Celebrating and rewarding people for shari
ng knowledge and using "stolen" or
borrowed knowledge (with proper attribution, of course)

5.

Hiring new workers partly on the basis of their potential for knowledge behaviors

6.

Giving workers and managers some "slack" for knowledge creation, sharing, use, and
general reflection

7.

Educating all employees on the attributes of knowledge
-
based business and
knowledge management


14


OBJECTIVE 4

Linking knowledge to behavior

We need to realize the vital connection between knowledge
-
oriented behavior and overall
employee p
erformance. The field needs to begin linking the day
-
to
-
day behaviors of knower
with the knowledge they employ

or could have employed. Too many knowledge projects
focus only on "stocking the shelves" with knowledge, with little regard for why or how users
might be motivated to draw on a piece of knowledge in their work routines. Indeed, we still
know very little about the favorable circumstances that stimulate people in organizations to
create, share, or apply knowledge.


1.

Observe key knowledge workers

Our
first step should be to observe key knowledge workers in different environments
to learn more about their knowledge behaviors.

a.

How do they individually reconcile the need to balance learning and doing?

b.

How much time do the most effective workers spend acc
essing knowledge
resources, and

c.

How do they go about it?

d.

Are intellectually curious workers born that way (or at least have acquired
this temperament before they enter our organizations as workers), or can
they be cultivated?


Until we understand better th
e factors that drive knowledge behaviors, we won't have
effective knowledge environments.


2.

Account for information and knowledge overload

One key factor that our knowledge management approaches must begin to take into
account is information and knowledge o
verload. The central problem of knowledge
management in the years ahead will be "managing the flow of knowledge through and
around the critical bottleneck of personal attention and learning capacity," as one
forward
-
looking Hewlett
-
Packard manager put it.
Unless we link our efforts to
manage knowledge to programs designed to maximize individual attention and
minimize distraction, we'll never succeed in realizing the true potential of knowledge
management.




15

OBJECTIVE 5

Linking knowledge to business environ
ment

A final unexplored dimension of knowledge management is its relation to physical space in
the workplace, which can be a pivotal factor in knowledge creation and transfer.
Organizational theorists still know relatively little about how the physical e
nvironment affects
knowledge and its management. However, there is reason to suspect a strong causal
relationship.



PHASE 3:
maturing and continuous improvement



OBJECTIVE

Sustain, study and modify the system for optimum performance.



PHASE 4:
buildin
g external focus


OBJECTIVE

Be capable of building stand
-
alone/ web
-
based knowledge/ learning/ content
management products or provide knowledge (explicit and tacit) centric solutions
to our clients.
























This is a one
-
line proof...if w
e start

sufficiently far to the left.




. Mathematics Lecturer,,

Oxford University