Interpersonal Knowledge Sharing:

collardsdebonairManagement

Nov 6, 2013 (3 years and 9 months ago)

89 views

Interpersonal Knowledge Sharing:

The Low
-
Tech, High
-
Touch Side of Knowledge
Management

Objectives


To present
one perspective

on the theory
and practice of knowledge sharing, a
humanistic counterpoint to mechanistic
knowledge management.

FV


To
illustrate

how knowledge sharing can be
encouraged (not managed).


To
open a discussion

of best practices in this
area.

Agenda


Overview of NCR


Status of Knowledge Management at NCR



Two Models of Knowledge Management


Sharing Knowledge Over Mail Lists


Impact on NCR’s Business



The Art and Science of Fostering CoPs


Discussion

NCR Corporation


Revenue:
$6 billion


Employees:
32,000 in






80 countries


Headquarters:
Dayton, Ohio


Key Offerings:


Relationship Technology
TM

Solutions built on


Teradata® Warehousing (TD)


Automated Teller Machines (FSD)


Retail Point
-
of
-
Sale Systems (RSD)


Consumable Media and Supplies (SMD)


Comprehensive Service and Support (WCSD)

NCR Corporation


Strategic Challenge:

Transition from a product manufacturer (1880
-
1990)

to a solution provider (1990
-
2000+).


New Environment:
The virtual workplace


KM Implications:


?

NCR Corporation


Strategic Challenge:

Transition from a product manufacturer (1880
-
1990)

to a solution provider (1990
-
2000+).


New Environment:
The virtual workplace


KM Implications:


Legacy knowledge is both asset and liability


New knowledge and skills needed throughout
company


Much (most?) innovation occurs in the field, not at
plants or headquarters


Field personnel are physically more isolated

HV

NCR’s Initial Approach to KM


Corporate KM Champion Assigned (1995)


Initial Focus
-

Capture/re
-
use of knowledge
gained in professional services engagements


Parallel efforts in several business units,
particularly customer services


Corporate team sponsored KAM
-

the
Knowledge Asset Manager (based on Notes)


NCR’s Knowledge Asset Mgr.

KAM “Communities”

Status of KM at NCR


Business Units are driving requirements and
projects


Informal cross
-
BU collaboration


New cross
-
BU initiative for Professional
Services Automation using Changepoint™


Growing awareness of importance of
communities of interest and practice


New KM Community of Practice

founded in
January 2002

KM Evolution

Knowledge

Sharing

Culture

Knowledge Management
IS

Connecting the right people, to the
right knowledge, at the right time.

Managed

Knowledge

Assets

Knowledge
Management is
NOT

Managing the capture of
explicit knowledge

KM Lessons Learned


The value proposition must start with your
people


A knowledge
-
sharing
culture

is critical to
embracing knowledge management


KM best practices must be integrated with business
processes


Collaboration

is key to knowledge transfer


Recognizing, rewarding and measuring

KM
best practices must be balanced and consistent.


Technology
serves only as an “enabler”


Today’s Starting Point

Knowledge exists only in human heads.

Data

Information

Chaos

X

X

X

Knowledge

Wisdom

Justice

Two Ways to Transfer Knowledge

Information

Processing

Model

Corporate

Knowledge Resources

Two Ways to Transfer Knowledge

Personal Communication Model

1

2

Interpersonal Knowledge Sharing

Information

Processing

Model

Corporate

Knowledge Resources

FV

A KM/KS Comparison Matrix

Criteria
Information
Processing
Model
Interpersonal
Communication
Model
Knowledge
Form
Independent,
elemental
Interdependent,
integral
Delivery
Leverage
1 : 10
3
1:10
0
Contextual
Richness
Lower
Higher
Innovation
Potential
Lower
Higher
Asset Stability
High
Moderate
Value Over
Time
Decreasing
?
Cost Over
Time
Increasing
(Maintenance)
Increasing
(Wage Inflation)
Access

Method

System
Interface

Human
Interaction

FV

A Model of Associate Competence

Canonical Knowledge
:


Theoretical knowledge gained
through reading and formal
instruction. Also the approved
information and procedures by
which associates are expected

to serve customers.

C

Non
-
canonical Knowledge
:


Practical knowledge gained from
personal experience or from other
people and not yet accepted into the
official (canonical) knowledge of the
company.

N

* “Express” and apply” are different skills. The


former is related to communication, while the


latter is focused on implementation.

S

Skills
:


The means by which associates
express or apply* their canonical
and non
-
canonical knowledge.

Competence Stereotypes

Professional

(Graduate/Postgraduate


Degree)

C

N

S

Technician

(High School Diploma)

C

N

S

New College

Hire

C

N

S

Others?

Knowledge Transfer Strategies

KNOWLEDGE

DOMAIN:

NARROW

MODERATE

BROAD

EXAMPLE:

Telephone Fault Diagnosis

& Resolution

On
-
Site System Installation

& Maintenance

Enterprise Information

Architecture Design







CONTEXT:

STRATEGY:

TOOLS:

METRICS:



CCC

Structured Knowledge

Capture and Guided

Rediscovery



Databases



Guided Search Interface



On
-
line Manuals



Time
-
to
-
solve



Escalation levels



Customer sat.

Field CE

On
-
line Databases &

Practitioner Knowledge

Exchange



Databases



Internet access



Communities of Practice

(

CoP)



Time
-
to
-
solve



No. of visits



Customer sat.







PS

On
-
line Databases &

Practitioner Knowledge

Exchange

Databases

Internet access

Communities of Practice

(

CoP)

Win/loss ratio

Billable time ratio

Customer sat.

Knowledge Transfer Strategies

KNOWLEDGE

DOMAIN:

NARROW

MODERATE

BROAD

EXAMPLE:

Telephone Fault Diagnosis

& Resolution

On
-
Site System Installation

& Maintenance

Enterprise Information

Architecture Design

CONTEXT:

CCC

Field CE

PS

STRATEGY:

Structured Knowledge

Capture and Guided

Rediscovery

On
-
line Databases &

Practitioner Knowledge

Exchange

On
-
line Databases &

Practitioner Knowledge

Exchange

TOOLS:



Databases



Guided Search Interface



On
-
line Manuals



Databases



Internet access



Communities of Practice

(

CoP)



Databases



Internet access



Communities of Practice

(

CoP)

METRICS:





Time
-
to
-
solve



Escalation levels



Customer sat.



Time
-
to
-
solve



No. of visits



Customer sat.



Win/loss ratio



Billable time ratio



Customer sat.

APPLICABLE

MODEL:

Personal Communication

Information Processing

Applying the KS Model

N

S

Professional

Consultant

New College

Hire

C

Field

Experience

Mentored


Practice

Design

Spec’s

Internet Technology

Information & Communication

-

Professional Services
-

C

N

S

Customer

Community of Practice

Technical

Diagnostician

Para
-
Technical

Call Taker

Comprehensive

Knowledge

Solution

Applying the KM Model
-

1997

-

Worldwide Remote Services
-

CBR Technology

N

S

C

Field

Experience

Design

Spec’s


Dialog


Prompts

C

N

S

CoP

Technical

Diagnostician

Para
-
Technical

Call Taker

Comprehensive

Knowledge

Solution

Applying the KM Model
-

2002

-

Customer Care Center
-

CKS Technology

N

S

C

Field

Experience

Design

Spec’s


Guided


Search

C

N

S

Supporting the KS Model


Continuous Knowledge Sharing


Mailing Lists


Periodicals (external and internal)


Regular Symposia


Communities of Practice


Just In Time Knowledge Sharing


Mailing Lists


Expert locator (e.g. AskMe.com)

Mailing Lists

Mailing Lists

NCR’s Web
-
Archived Mail Lists


Released in late 1995


Target users: Field practitioners


Design bias: Field
-
to
-
field communications


Uneven management sponsorship


Pilot (‘95
-

‘96)


Production (‘97
-

‘99)


Orphan (‘99 … )

Mailing List Architecture

Mailing List Architecture

Mailing List Architecture

Mailing List Architecture

Mailing List Architecture

Mail List Statistics


Released:





November 1995


Total Lists:






525


Active Lists (<90d):



78 (15%)



(<30d):



53 (10%)


Current subscribers:

13,000


Current subscriptions:

50,000 (4/subscriber)


Cumulative Postings:

62,000


Contributors:




9,000


Author Distribution:

[51|23|15|7|3|.8|.1]


Keys to Successful KS


Start with existing relationships


Provide simple, unobtrusive communication
support (participation must be optional)


Support de facto community leaders


Publicize (but don’t hype) successes


Do not impose formal objectives on
participation and contribution


Do not introduce new processes and
procedures


Allow good things to happen...

Mailing List Study
-

“ATR”


Created:



October 1996; 30 subscribers


Initial Name:


A
dvanced
T
ech.
R
esearch


Purpose:



News alerts from ATR director


Signal Event:


“Reply All” in December 1996


First Discussion:



13 Jan 1997 (4 replies)


Renamed:


A Terrific Resource (Jan. 1999)


Current subscribers:

940


Cumulative Postings:

13,000+ over 5 years


Contributors:



1,000+

Problem
-
> Solution:



14

Request for Tip/Experience:


11

Competitor/Partner Info:


4

General Information:



4

Customer References:


2

New Application:



1

Providing New Advice/Tool:


1

Miscellaneous:



1


Total:


38

A Week In the Life of “ATR”


Content

New Messages:



19


-
> Replies:




19


Total:


38


(ca. 7/day)

USA:


24

Austria:


2

Pakistan:


2

Canada:


1

China:


1

Denmark:


1

Hong Kong:


1

Hungary:


1

India:


1

New Zealand:


1

U. Arab Emir.:


1


Total:


38

Geography

Business Impact 1
-

Prima Facie

The statistics on the previous slides suggest a
strong prima facie case for the business value
of the mailing lists:


Given a choice, 13,000 busy NCR
associates from 50 countries around
the world would not continue their
subscriptions to and participation in the
mailing lists if they did not provide
useful information and services.


FV

Business Impact 2
-

War Stories


Supporting new sales

“I presented [our CRM solution] to the decision makers of a bank in Hong
Kong.
We won that deal

due to some key messaging and positioning of our
product compared to our competitors. I posted my presentation on the CRM
List. A number of responses indicated it would help them position us against
our competitors in the future.” [Australia
-

Value: Not disclosed]


Solving customer problems

“In Dec 01 we upgraded a large Teradata site. A hidden problem popped up all
of a sudden which was a very critical issue for business users at the site. A
quick shot to ATR revealed a known issue elsewhere in the world and
24 hrs
later a patched version could be deployed
.” [Austria
-

Value: $1.8M annually]


Improving NCR solutions

“The ss
-
fbd
-
emv mailing list was
fundamental during the development of the
FBD EMV Application Kernel

and in obtaining the first EMV Level 2 approval for
an ATM Application in the world.” [Europe
-

Value: US$ 5 million over 3 years.]

Business Impact 3
-

ROI


Initial cost:



$75 K + $15 K (HW)


Ongoing costs:


$60 K ($10 K/yr.)


Value of:


Deals won



$ 1 M


Time saved



$ 1 M


Deals influenced


$ 1 M


Customers retained


$ 1 M


Competitors thwarted

$ 1 M

Σ = $ 5 M

(.01% of NCR’s
revenues over
six years)

Business Impact 3
-

ROI


Initial cost:



$75 K + $15 K (HW)


Ongoing costs:


$60 K ($10 K/yr.)


Value of:


Deals won



$ 1 M


Time saved



$ 1 M


Deals influenced


$ 1 M


Customers retained


$ 1 M


Competitors thwarted

$ 1 M

Σ = $ 5 M

(.01% of NCR’s
revenues over
six years)


Pro Forma ROI:


33:1


The “MasterCard analysis”:

Priceless

Definition of Community

A Community of Practice is an informal
network of people engaged in a particular
profession, occupation, or job function
who actively seek to work more effectively
and to understand their work more fully.


Formal
Organization

Communities and Organizations

Formal
Organization

Communities and Organizations

Community
Orientation

Community of Practice

Community Ecosystem

Community of Practice

Community Ecosystem

Personal
Networks

Community of Practice

Community Ecosystem

Personal
Networks

Formal
Teams

The Invisible Key to Success

“Communities of practice are the shop
floor of human capital, the place where
the stuff gets made.

… “They're like professional societies.
People join and stay because they have
something to learn and to contribute. The
work they do is the joint and several
property of the group
--
cosa nostra, ‘our
thing.’"





-

Tom Stewart






Fortune






5 August 1996

Reflections on Community
-

1

The problem is that corporate types don't
know from community.

They think
network. They think conference. They
think in safe, gray office metaphors that
don't rock the boat. Their only question
is, "So, how are you better than
NetMeeting, Microsoft's conferencing
software?"





-

Chris Tacy,
Underdeveloped






NYT Cybertimes






2 July 1997

Reflections on Community
-

2


Learning is social, but not all groups learn


It is possible to:


Seed new communities


Enhance existing communities


Link formal and informal learning


Align community and organizational objectives

Thereby increasing communications and
knowledge sharing effectiveness

The Community Life Cycle

1

Potential

4

Established

2

Nascent

Reformed

5

3

Developing

The Community Life Cycle

1

Potential

4

Established

2

Nascent

Reformed

5

3

Developing

Conclusions


Knowledge sharing is essential to KM


Knowledge sharing is a natural part of
natural community behavior


Communities can be seeded, fostered,
guided, and supported, but not managed


Successful communication technologies are
simple and convenient


Knowledge sharing is incomplete and messy


The ROI on simple technologies can be very
high


FV

Discussion


Thoughts on the KS/KM models?


Other examples of ways to support KS?


Policies?
-

Research
?


Processes?


Technologies?


Other examples? Counter
-
examples?


Impact of emerging technologies


Wireless communications


Real
-
time language translation


Others?