The Art of Managing Knowledge
A Practitioner’s Guide
Judi N Sandrock
Published by Judi Sandrock at Smashwords
© Judi N Sandrock 2010
Designed and typeset by Sue Sandrock
Printed copies available from
This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each person you share it with. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then you should return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.
This book is dedicated to the memory of Melissie Clemmons Rumizen, my mentor, coach, guide and friend.
Acknowledgements
I could not have written this book without the unwavering support of my husband, Bjarke Gotfredsen. Also, I would like to thank my colleagues at Anglo American and my fellow practitioners in the Knowledge Management Practitioners Group for often saying “I can’t wait to see this book!” They all helped to galvanise my resolve to complete it. Gratitude also goes to Mike and Jo Sandrock who brought me up to love writing and reading, and for their critical review and editing of the manuscript. In addition I would like to recognise Stan Oliver, who taught me very early in my career that true value only comes from leveraging knowledge, and to Syd Druion who later in my career has always appreciated the knowledge I share. Both Stan and Syd have been formative mentors in my career.
I would also like to recognise Con Fauconnier and Richard Wadley for their faith in me and allowing me a free reign at Kumba Resources. My time in their organisation was the most rewarding of my career as a knowledge manager.
Special thanks to Verna Allee, Dave Bentley, Debbie Blackburn, Theo Botma, Bob Buckman, Lourina de Beer, Stephen Denning, Van Der Spuy Brink, Nancy Dixon, Bertie du Plessis, David Gurteen, Marina Hiscock, Riaan Joubert, Seth Kahan, Refiloe Mabaso, Richard McDermott, Nydia Mentoor, Victor Newman, Steve Sandrock, Tana Saunders, Karl Schoemaker, David Snowden, Retha Snyman, Karl-Erik Sveiby, Peter Tobin, Hein van Eck, Pieter van Heerden, Etienne Wenger and Gloria Young who as steadfast members of the knowledge management fratrnity have supported, advised, and accompanied me over the years.
Karl Schoemaker and Riaan Joubert took valuable time to read the manuscript and give me excellent feedback. Their input has been crucial for completion of this book
Foreword
With this book I hope to achieve what I spend most of my time trying to convince others to do – share knowledge in a way that it can be applied. The reason why it is called The Art of Managing Knowledge is that it is an art. To succeed, one has to have the passion mixed with a little talent, followed up with lots of hard work and practice. I have tried to make this book as user-friendly as possible, starting with a strategy development section, followed by the description of each of the strategy building blocks. This is followed by a section on communities of practice - I believe they deserve a book on their own - and the book concludes with the components of supporting knowledge management to ensure sustainability.
This book is meant to be a guide to practitioners, and I welcome all feedback on Judi@Sandrockgotfredsen.com.
Part 1 Starting to Manage Knowledge
In the beginning, we need to look at definitions of knowledge, the knowledge worker, and knowledge management. It is important to be able to create one’s own definitions so that when asked for a definition, the answer is clear, quick and unwavering. With anything new, people fear change and they need to have confidence in the team implementing the change. Therefore, the background understanding is crucial.
Introduction to Knowledge Management
Organisations have come to realise that knowledge is one of their most valuable resources currently not being used to its full potential. We need knowledge to flow freely across the organisation so that people can enjoy the benefits of one another’s know-how and experience. After all, the more people know about what their colleagues know, the better they can all perform – as individuals, as business units, and as organisations.
Think about this scenario. A team of colleagues has been trying to come up with a solution to a problem for weeks, and all the ideas that they have put to the test so far have drawn a blank. Pressure from management continues to mount, production slows, money is lost, and team members are stressed out and demoralised. Meanwhile, a group of experts from another business unit within the same organisation dealt with a similar problem just a few years or months ago. If only the frustrated group could be put in touch with those who have already come up with the answers to their problem. The fact is that by effectively sharing and managing knowledge, this can be done.
Defining “Knowledge”
In September 2007 I attended a conference in Barcelona, Spain and was involved in a discussion facilitated by David Gurteen1 looking at how we think about “knowledge”. Some knowledge managers fall into the trap of treating knowledge like an object and forget that it needs to flow, grow, be shared and has intangible properties. Here are some examples of how people have defined knowledge with the metaphors they use:
Knowledge is water
The properties that emerge when using this metaphor are that knowledge flows, it can be stored for future use, it must be treated well to be safe for human consumption, and is essential to the survival and growth of human beings.
Knowledge is energy
The energy analogy allows us to see that knowledge can be generated from various sources, can be stored and can be transformed to suit the requirements. Importantly, we can only see the effects of energy and not energy itself. Knowledge and energy display second-order properties2 often only detectable by the beholder. Current theory also holds that energy cannot be destroyed, it can only be transformed. It can be used for good and evil purposes, and the values and integrity of the user determine to what ends it is used.
Knowledge is relationship
Relationships require trust and reciprocity. There needs to be sharing, a growth of trust over time, and there is only value when there is more than one person. When we are young we need to learn and seek out mentors, and as we age we wish to leave a legacy and yearn for young people to mentor.
The shortcoming of objectising knowledge
Treating knowledge as a “thing” implies that it loses value over time and eventually needs to be “thrown away”. Also, it implies that we can totally disconnect it from the knower and manage it like any other physical non-living asset of the organisation. The last two sentences display values and ethics which are not conducive to good relationships with people in organisations. Also, if knowledge is treated like an object, the analytical manager will require that it is valued in terms of numbers only. This results in the true value of the knowledge being lost as only the tangible qualities can be quantified, and the qualitative values are lost in the perceptions of management.
Knowledge cannot be separated from the knower; the tangible aspects can be stored for future use and the tacit components can only be shared. Building relationships between subject matter experts and learners needs to be the focus of knowledge management efforts.
Knowledge is not the same as Information
In many instances I detect that people are using the words “knowledge” and “information” interchangeably. This is incorrect and misleading. Hopefully the descriptions below will give some clarity to the differences between knowledge and information.
Knowledge is:
Timeless
Shareable
Only relevant if connected to the knower
Dependent on context
Transformable
Multi-dimensional
Information is:
Perishable
Lacking in context
Static
Disconnected from the person who interprets it
One-dimensional
Open to multiple interpretations
Information is an object, and by treating knowledge the same way we run the risk of neither realising the value of the tacit nature of the knowledge nor recognising the knower.
The Knowledge Worker
The characteristics of knowledge workers make them very different from the other “resources” of an organisation, and examples of these characteristics are:
Knowledge work has no geographical boundaries and can be conducted across the world. An example is the growth of professional services consulting being sourced from India.
The Internet has allowed knowledge to flow at the speed of light, making the transfer of knowledge almost instantaneous.
Knowledge workers can create their own destiny through education and perseverance, and success is no longer based on birthright.
Knowledge workers associate themselves first as their expertise area, not the organisation. For example, on introduction a knowledge worker will say “I am a radiologist, and currently I am working at the General Hospital”.
Knowledge is either applicable or it is not. If one requires a dentist, a heart surgeon will not do. With manual work, people can be used for many different tasks without significant consequences.
The impact of knowledge workers on organisational effectiveness will increase with time and will become the equivalent to that of the blue collar worker in the height of the Industrial era.
Benefits of Managing Knowledge
There are many reasons why sharing knowledge within an organisation is vital to the success of the organisation. Some of the benefits are:
Problems are resolved faster and more efficiently
Cost savings result from faster access to knowledge
Best practices are shared
There is better utilisation of tangible assets and the people within an organisation
The repetition of costly mistakes can be avoided
More informed and rapid decision-making
Employees experience less frustration in getting the job done
People can access those who have the know-how to assist them in performing their jobs in the most effective way possible
There is a reduction in “silo mentality” which stalls knowledge sharing across an organisation. In other words knowledge flows freely between departments, disciplines and levels of hierarchy.
New employees and those who have been transferred get up to speed faster
In many cases, the risks associated with not managing and sharing knowledge effectively are too severe to contemplate. There are organisations which could go out of business in the future if they do not attend to effective knowledge sharing amongst their employees.
Determining What to Share
Knowledge sharing efforts can be abandoned if the knowledge being shared is not vital to the organisation. A recommended approach would be to take the organisation’s strategy, and from that determine the important knowledge to be gained and retained. In addition, the core competencies of the organisation should be determined and used as a starting point. By interviewing the leadership the strategic thrusts and core competencies can be elicited, and their support can be garnered at the same time.
Anecdote
A paper customer called the paper mill to complain about the quality of the product he had been receiving. When the supplier team visited the customer they found that the paper was performing badly on the bag-making machine, and the waste was unacceptably high. The team analysed the problem and found it difficult to determine the cause of the problem. In his frustration, the customer commented “You had the same problem five years ago and solved it then. Have you all forgotten?” His grievance was justified, as none of the team members had been around for the five years, and the organisation as a whole had done nothing to ensure that learning was retained. This incident sparked the creation of a knowledge sharing initiative to ensure that within the team from the paper mill learning was retained, irrespective of the members making up the team.
In all organisations there will be stories about how problems have been resolved, or have persisted according to the degree of effort applied to retaining knowledge over time.
Fundamentals of Knowledge Management
With the understanding of what knowledge is and why we want share it the fundamentals of knowledge management come to the fore. The key output of knowledge management is to recognise the subject matter expert and facilitate the sharing of knowledge so that all in the organisation can benefit and grow. The processes and concepts shared in this book attempt to achieve these ends.
A Definition for Knowledge Management
The most contentious argument at knowledge management conferences is always a “definition for knowledge management”. Asking for an overarching definition is misleading as each organisation defines knowledge management in terms of its strategy. All organisations which have succeeded in managing their knowledge will have their own definitions and these cannot be directly transposed onto other organisations starting out. Therefore, the definition of knowledge management comes from the knowledge management strategy and not a dictionary.
Strategy and Strategic Choices
The term “strategy” often frightens people as they feel they have to produce a hundred-page binder on their approach. The clearest and most successful strategies fit on to one A4 page, and are clear for everyone to understand.
This section will not cover the theory of strategy or the development of an organisation’s strategy, but allow for the understanding of the strategy being implemented by the organisation.
To expand on the strategic approach to be taken, we need to look at the strategic choice your organisation has already taken. The graphic below outlines the five high-level strategic choices organisations make, with characteristics for you to relate one to your organisation.
It may be tempting to choose more than one strategic type, but don’t. Choose the one that most resembles that of your organisation, and if in doubt, consult your colleagues. The strategic choice you make will determine the appropriateness of your knowledge management strategy and you cannot be all things to everyone. This is the point at which you put your stake in the sand.
Establish the Status Quo
It is a good idea to run a knowledge management diagnostic survey which will give you a good indication of what you already have, and which can be leveraged in your knowledge management strategy implementation. Also, it will prevent you from reinventing the wheel, by developing a strategy to implement building blocks already in existence. A diagnostic can be set up for you by going to the website www.sandrockgotfredsen.com and then to the Products and Tools link.
We have seen many knowledge management practitioners create enemies for themselves by ignoring the efforts of their predecessors. Recreating the work of others is insulting as it implies that their efforts were irrelevant. Build on what they have done, and show that you are using what is in place as a platform for improvement.
Knowledge Management Strategy
The knowledge management strategy needs to support the organisation’s strategy. In order to have any success whatsoever, you need to make sure that you are enabling the delivery of the strategy through your efforts, and communicating your results in terms of the strategy as well. It is tempting to imitate an initiative shared at a conference which was very successful in another organisation – but beware – not all organisations are the same, as their strategies are not the same.
In order to implement the knowledge management strategy it needs to be divided into defined building blocks. Part 2 gives a comprehensive view of the building blocks essential for the strategic choice of the organisation, as well as those you can look at in the later stages of implementation.
To start with, do not plan to build less than three or more than five building blocks. The reason for having at least three is that not everything works as expected, and should one thrust of the strategy fail, you have two successes to show results for. A maximum of five is suggested as you cannot be everything to everyone, and you have to prioritise your efforts. Taking on too much can be gratifying to the ego, but results in no delivery as the efforts are spread too thinly. Prioritising also allows you to say no to colleagues who want you include the latest fad they saw at the latest conference.
Identifying Core Competencies
The concept of core competencies was developed in the management field by C.K. Prahalad and Gary Hamel when they introduced the concept in a 1990 Harvard Business Review article.3 They wrote that a core competency is "an area of specialized expertise that is the result of harmonizing complex streams of technology and work activity”. In essence, a core competency provides value to the organisation, is difficult for competitors to imitate, and can be leveraged across the organisation.
To identify core competences, study the organisation’s strategy to determine what is required for sustainability and growth, even if those competencies still need to be developed or acquired. Interview senior leadership; they will be able to point very clearly to the core competencies required for the future. This is the knowledge which needs to be managed first.
Understanding the Culture
Taking note of the culture when implementing knowledge management is always a talking point at conferences on the subject. There is no such thing as a ”bad” or “wrong” culture, simply programmes which do not fit the culture appropriately. National and organisational cultures are increasingly being recognised as major barriers when attempting to make full use of the knowledge held in the minds of the employees in an organisation. Cultures and sub-cultures shape assumptions about what knowledge is and what kind of knowledge is worth managing. They also define who should control information, who should share it, and who can hoard it. Culture influences the context for social interaction and how knowledge is used in particular situations. It also shapes the processes by which new knowledge is created, legitimised, and distributed across an organisation.
If we are aware that cultural problems do indeed exist, and have an understanding of how they can affect human behaviour, we will be more equipped to overcome the obstacles that might crop up. Consider this: some of the members in the team are reluctant to share information on past mistakes made at their business units. It is important that they speak out so that these sometimes costly errors are not repeated, but why are they clamming up?
One needs to consider how their particular business units react to mistakes. Are they covered up, explained away, severely punished, or ignored? This is just one aspect of how organisational culture drives behaviour.
Culture influences the emotions, behaviour and perceptions of people and, simply put, distinguishes one group from another. In Culture’s Consequences G.H. Hofstede4 names four cultural dimensions that are bound to influence how people behave in their community:
Power distance - In small power-distance countries like Austria and Sweden, there is limited dependence on bosses by subordinates, and there is intense communication between both parties. Communication is an asset, and information flows naturally. However, in large power-distance countries, Malaysia, for example, there is a great tolerance of inequality, and at the workplace this is seen in the wide distance between bosses and subordinates. Information is related to power, and the belief may be that the more information you share, the less powerful you are. To encourage knowledge sharing in an organisation with a large power-distance, create a platform or pedestal for the subject matter experts to share their experiences in a formal setting. If there is a small power-distance, have people in a group around a table or in a virtual collaboration room, and encourage free flow of sharing.
Individualism verses collectivism - In individualistic countries such as Denmark the ties between individuals are loose, and everyone is expected to look after him or herself and their immediate families only. In collective countries like Spain, people are integrated in strong, cohesive groups. In an individualistic organisation, you can expect people to want individual recognition for their experience and to be rewarded alone ( and materially) for their sharing of knowledge. However, if there is a collective culture, people are happier if the team is rewarded and they do not feel possessive about their knowledge or experiences.
Masculine and feminine cultural traits - This cultural dimension deals with the differences between masculine and feminine values and behaviour. “Masculinity” refers to societies like Japan, where men are supposed to be assertive, tough and focused on material success, while women should be more modest, tender and concerned with quality of life. In “feminine” societies, the roles overlap. The Nordic countries are the most feminine, and there is strong emphasis on co-operating with others. We might therefore expect that they are more interested in experimenting with new ideas and sharing information, and more tolerant of risk-taking and mistake-making. In more “masculine” organisations, people will be prepared to relate their stories of success, and will be reluctant to admit failure, even if others can learn from those mistakes.
Uncertainty avoidance - Uncertainty avoidance is followed to the extent to which members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations. In strong uncertainty avoidance countries like Spain, there is a strong preference for rules and regulations as a means to reduce risks associated with unknown situations. This hampers the emergence of new concepts and the implementation of innovations and fresh ideas. In cultures where ambiguity is accepted, rules and regulations have no relevance, and decisions are based on shared values and strategic alignment.
Time Barriers
When organising virtual meetings, it is important to be sensitive to the diverse routines of those involved, some of whom will be situated in different time zones. One should give ample notice prior to these sessions, as many will either be participating early in the morning or after office hours, and will need to make special arrangements. World clocks and international calendars are available on the Internet as well as in calendar software.
Consider the organisation in terms of these cultural characteristics and design your interventions with them in mind.
Promoting the Programme to Leadership
The knowledge management programme will not be effective without senior leadership support and sponsorship. Therefore, it is very important for knowledge managers to be professional in their approach and to ensure that the organisation’s leadership feel that there is a positive contribution being made. They are usually very well versed in organisational effectiveness and need to be shown where the benefits from knowledge management are.
Make appointments to see each of the senior leaders in person, and indicate the reason for your visit. Draw up a presentation which shows case studies of knowledge management in similar organisations, the strategy and its implementation plan, and the benefits realised so far. It is recommended that theory and rhetoric be avoided as these will detract from the value being presented. Make it short and sweet, and encourage them to ask questions.
Promoting Knowledge Management in the Business
A promotion campaign will need to be developed to run concurrently with the strategy implementation. If the organisation has a communications or public relations department, ask for their assistance, as this is their area of expertise. If not, visit organisations which have been successful in the art of knowledge management and find out how they ran their promotion campaign.
The most important components of the campaign are the recognition of those sharing their knowledge and the successes of the programme in terms of the value realised. Rather promote more than less as one has to get through the bombardment of messages people are subject to from many sources in the organisation. Be consistent so that people realise that the programme is ongoing and not a fad.
Basics of Change Management
The first thing to know about change management is that the term “change” should never be used. Since the re-engineering craze of the 1980s people have become “change-fatigued” and are tired of change for the sake of it. Never utter the phrase ‘the only constant in life is change” as it is way over-used and corny.
However, when implementing knowledge management we are asking people to change the way they work. These changes can be fundamental and may seem unnatural to the knowledge worker. For example, we are trained through our schooling to write exams without asking our peers for assistance, yet in a knowledge sharing organisation, we expect people to ask for help. In addition, the expertise and experience of knowledge workers have become their power base and they may feel that sharing their learning they are diminishing their power.
The following four factors will help in bringing about the change required:
A compelling vision of the future and a purpose to believe in. Before people leave the status quo, they need to understand the future which lies ahead of them. The knowledge manager needs to create a vision of what that future will look like to facilitate that change. The most successful way of doing this is to arrange presentations from knowledge workers from organisations which are well down the road to being knowledge sharing organisations. Their presentations should include what it was like before the change and how it is after the change, stressing the positive effect on them as individuals. Make sure that the organisations they represent are similar in strategy to your own, yet not competitors. People need to relate to the presenter on a personal level and imagine themselves in this new future, and visualise themselves being better off. The compelling vision of the future needs to be reiterated in articles, speeches, anecdotes, posters and all forms of communication. The messages need to be identical, simple and consistent.
Reinforcing through recognition systems. There will be those who embrace the change early and they need to be recognised for doing so. These people are those who like to innovate, like to take the lead into the future and set the example for others to follow. Public recognition of these early adopters achieves two things: they receive the recognition they yearn for as pioneers, and the required behaviour is demonstrated for those expected to follow. The majority of people prefer to change only once they have seen someone else change, and the public recognition of the early adopters gives them the explicit evidence that it is safe to change. The recognition should be very public in the form of articles and posters. Have photographs of the early adopters being thanked and recognised by senior leaders and role models in the organisation, so that it can be seen that they have been “caught doing the right things”.
Providing the skills for the future state. With all change, people have to be equipped to behave in the right way. Therefore, make sure that the knowledge management team is trained and ready to implement the strategy, the knowledge sharing support infrastructure is in place, all collaboration technology is tested and in place, and that the leaders are aware that they will be called upon to publicly support the change. In addition, training of the knowledge workers may be required, especially when it comes to the collaboration technology. The concepts and practicalities of knowledge management will need to be shared, and the best way of doing this is in one-day workshops.
Ensure consistent role models. The knowledge management initiative and the change to be implemented need role models to communicate the compelling vision of the future, to recognise the right behaviour and to communicate the value of the change to the individuals and organisation. These role models should include senior leadership as well as those respected in the organisation, at all levels. Beware of having too few role models, as they could be lone voices and develop the reputation of being too maverick. Ensure that these role models truly buy into the change and are not simply paying lip service – integrity or the lack of it shouts louder than any perfectly formulated message.
Getting Started
Believe it or not, this is the most difficult part of your implementation. Procrastination is a well camouflaged enemy, as it is too easy to feel that you are not ready, that you have not visited enough organisations who have implemented what you want to do, that you do not have enough senior leadership support, and the list can be long. Warning – do not procrastinate. There will never be enough reference sites, enough money, enough high-level support or resources. The reason for this is that unless you can show results, you will not gain support or additional resources. By procrastinating you will lose the support and funding you have and end up with a reputation of “not being able to deliver” and a generator of excuses. Like anything, implementing your knowledge management strategy will be ten per cent inspiration and ninety per cent perspiration.
Just start. Rather develop the reputation of someone who changes the plan through learning than get the reputation of a procrastinator.
Part 2 Building Blocks
At this point, we have an understanding of knowledge management, and the strategy has been formulated. In other words, the homework and planning are complete. Now the work starts.
Implementing the building blocks
This section outlines the building blocks which are required for the different strategic choices. Once you have conducted a knowledge management diagnostic, it is important to prioritise the building blocks and their sequence. It is likely that there are a number already in place, and that they simply need to be leveraged for full effectiveness. As mentioned earlier, chose between three and five to begin with.
This section of the book goes into each building block in detail, along with the activities and resources required, as well as the basics of the project plan.
The blocks are listed in some order of sequence simply out of necessity, and not in order of importance or priority. All organisations are different, and the knowledge management strategy implementation must be perfectly suited to that context.
Each building block is covered, noting the essentials to take note of, and there are case studies and references to further reading.
Information Audit
The term “Information Audit” is used here because this is the technical term, but it is recommended that when involved with this activity call it a “review” or “map” and not an “audit”. People don’t like to be “audited”.
Why conduct an information audit?
The information audit answers the following questions:
What information do people use regularly?
What information is there in the organisation that people need to base decisions on?
Where is the information generated – internally, externally?
How is the information used?
How do people want to receive this information?
Activities in an information audit
Compile an inventory of the information currently used, its users and location. This is the chopping block used during the interviews for people to add to.
Set up interviews and inform people of the nature of the discussion. Communicate the benefits to them of eliminating information overload while at the same time providing them with the information they need when they need it.
Update the inventory after the interviews
Calculate the cost savings of the elimination of duplication of information resources.
Present the findings.
Repeat annually to ensure the information provision is up to date and relevant.
What to measure to determine your success
Cost saving from elimination of duplication