Knowledge Management: Frameworks

and Case Studies

By Admin

Knowledge Management: Frameworks and Case Studies

 
by Madanmohan Rao; August 9, 2010
Editor, KM Chronicles http://bit.ly/TU12l
http://twitter.com/MadanRao
 
 
A two-day workshop on evolution of knowledge management and organisational case studies
was held recently in Bangalore at the campus of Xavier Institute of Management and
Entrepreneurship (www.xime.org). Workshop leaders included KM practitioners, authors and
academics, and the attendees were from the private and public sector.
 
One of the attendees remarked that average age in his organisation was 55, and he expected that
knowledge retention after employee retirement would be a huge problem. Another attendee was
of the opinion that KM works better in private sector companies than public sector or
government organisations. Yet another opinion expressed was that KM seems to work better in
younger organisations than older ones!
 
Speakers at the workshop showcased how KM has benefited organisations in a number of ways:
speedier response to customer queries (Xerox), bringing operational knowledge to onshore
engineers (Schlumberger), reducing operational costs (Chevron), using experiences for future use
(World Bank), reduced knowledge attrition despite a retiring workforce (Harvard Pilgrim), and
quantifiable effort savings in accounts/projects (Infosys).
 

KM Frameworks
 
Prof. Kanti Srikantaiah (http://amzn.to/cJwOYs) from Dominican University kicked off the
workshop by explaining key drivers of KM today: rapid product change (every six months, not
just 18 months), need for innovation, globalisation, and attrition. He traced the alphabet soup of
antecedents of KM: DBMS, MIS, DSS, ERP, JIT, TQM, BPR, benchmarking, datamining and
competitive intelligence.
 
KM has evolved in three phases, according to Kanti. The first phase revolved around best
practices and lessons learned, and was IT centric (tools, Internet/Intranet). The second phase was
defined by the view that “knowledge assets are no good if the people can not use them,” and was
dominated by a human relations movement: CoPs, organisational culture, formal/informal,
learning organisation, tacit knowledge. The third phase was centred more on discovery (“It’s no
good if people can’t find it”) – with a focus on taxonomy and a growing inclusion of information
professionals. (Interestingly, KM author Nancy Dixon has her own version of three phases of
evolution of KM: see http://bit.ly/ac5wJT.)
 
Kanti also addressed why people may not share knowledge: the organisation has no formal
process or dialogue space, employees do not know what they know, the organisation’s
environment may be excessively competitive, there is lack of trust and time, and there is no air of
curiosity in the organisation. Organisational transformations needed to create knowledge today
include comparison, connections, and conversation, Kanti summed up.
 
I explained the role of tools in KM initiatives, running through classifications of knowledge
processes and roles, activities for each, and relevant tools. I covered the “alphabet soup” of KM
tools, in three phases of evolution: content, collaboration and narrative (social media).
 
I showed the power of global social media with a couple of slides of tweets, re-tweets and
realtime feedback about the workshop, which is always an eye-opener to those who have never
before seen the power of Twitter! I also covered upto 15 reasons why emphasis only on
technology or tools can cause KM initiatives to fail (more details in my KM
books: http://bit.ly/TU12l).
 

Case Study I: Infosys

 
A. Latha, Group Head for KM at Infosys, presented an excellent case study of its KM journey
which has won multiple MAKE Global/Asia/India awards. She said key drivers of KM are
pervasion of knowledge infusion in decision making, and need for knowledge stocks and flows.
 
KM scope and scale should be broadened and deepened in organisations. For instance, strategic
planning usually involved a conclave for top management for three days - but this year Infosys
opened it up to newer employees also via Knowledge Cafes.
 
The KM initiative at Infosys is fueled by its cross-disciplinary aspects: cognitive sciences,
organisational behaviour, information sciences, epistemology, and economics (eg. theory of
value exchange).
 
KM eventually should become a regular part of work. The ultimate objective of a formal KM
programme, according to Latha, should be: Build, Own, Operate, Disappear! KM is a journey,
not a programme or project.
 
KM at Infosys has helped with quicker responses to market changes and client needs, and
dealing with people movement/turnover in projects. Key success factors for KM include high
level sponsorship, mid-level support and drive, and participation at all levels. Managers must set
the example here; one of the Infosys managers in China set a good example to employees by
personally committing to contribute knowledge assets.
 
At the same time, organisations should accept that only a small percentage of knowledge can be
codified. The extent of codification needs to be tempered with organisational realities, advised
Latha. “It is critical to let go of old knowledge,” she added; knowledge currency should be
recognised, and eventually some knowledge becomes outdated (eg. Y2K solutions).
 
The launch of KM in Infosys was sponsored by the then CEO of the company. Infosys has a KM
steering committee with regular reviews of KM maturity, mapping knowledge gaps in processes,
architecture, KRAs and measures.
 
Today, Infosys has a Body of Knowledge as well as a KM Showcase on InfyTV, an internal
channel. Infosys based its KM journey on the four principles of sharing: reciprocity, repute,
altruism, trust.
 
Organisations should also focus on “stealth” initiatives which do not require change
management, eg. Kmail, Project Snapshots at Infosys. The company has an automated tool called
Infosys KMail – employees send queries first to this specific id; and a database is searched for
responses.
 
As for metrics, Latha said KM measurement is primarily to feed to the KM culture and
demonstrate quick wins. Pockets of KM gains are measurable. A pre-launch audit identified
barriers to knowledge sharing (who to ask, where to look, too many portals, too much
information, poor quality, too busy, not a priority, geographic spread).
 
Without proper planning and evolution, KM approaches tend to get into a “whirlpool of value
erosion” due to lack of vision, alignment, consistency and synergy. KM initiatives cannot just be
translated from one office of a company to another office in another country – the local cultures
and business practices need to be studied.
 
Today, the KM initiative at Infosys is active in 4,000 knowledge areas, reflecting the growth of
technologies and business offerings. The company has filed a patent for its mechanism of
knowledge assessment and ratings called Knowledge Currency Unit. Infosys also has a brand
manager specifically for the KM group, whose brand personality is defined as reliable,
responsive and sensitive.
 
Over the past dozen years, KM at Infosys has evolved over a number of phases: e-learning,
Sparsh Intranet (pre-1998); KM launch, KShop (1999-2002); KM in projects, accounts; blogs
(2003-2006); integrated framework, Wiki, federated search, InfyTV (2007 onwards); and KM
brand measurement, deepening engagement in geographies (planned).
 
“Evolve your strategy over time. Find the balance between decentralisation and centralisation.
Bring in outside consultants,” Latha added. An adaptive architecture also helps (eg. with open
source components such as T-Wiki, MediaWiki). “For promoting KM, start with incentives, then
switch to recognition,” Latha advised.
 

Case Study II: Honeywell

 
Maria Christine, Lead at Honeywell Technology Solutions, began her case study with a superb
magic trick featuring a box with multiple opening flaps (a great beginning for a post-lunch
presentation!). She later included a “prisoner’s dilemma” exercise among groups of attendees to
explain employee knowledge sharing.
 
Honeywell’s KM initiative is called KALEIDO: “Knowledge and Learnings I Do,” and reflects
the kaleidoscopic nature of knowledge work.
 
In addition to mentoring, CoPs, expert validation, and best practices (for software reuse), KM at
Honeywell includes social network monitoring and analysis. “We used sociometric analysis to
discover informal knowledge networks in knowledge areas, knowledge actors and knowledge
flows,” said Maria.
 
Graph theory helped come up with maps of expertise and people connectivity with experts; this
was used to help improve collaborative links. For instance, low connectivity was perhaps an
indicator of a potential knowledge attrition point.
 
Maria focused on many of the human dimensions of knowledge sharing, and even joked that
sometimes knowledge contributions increase close to appraisal times and bonus evaluation
periods! She also cautioned that KM rewards and incentives schemes have to be transparent; they
should not be seen as biased or as favours from the management.
 
Contrary to popular perception, looking at others’ solutions does not hamper creativity but helps
improvise or extend them. “The business context has time pressures, and knowledge sharing
definitely helps here,” Maria added.
 
Honeywell has developed elaborate schemes for tracking knowledge competencies (eg. create,
validate, store, share), across timeframes – which are then colour coded for effective
visualisation.
 
 “KM has helped Honeywell build global talent, enable synergy across product lines, given better
career prospects for employees, and spurred innovation,” Maria summed up.
 

Case Study III: Perot/Dell

 
C.S. Shobha, Head of KM, Quality and Training at Dell Services (formerly Perot Systems),
covered the objectives and outcomes of the company’s KM initiative in areas such as project
management.
 
The objectives of the company’s KM Office include: elevate knowledge work to a key focus
direction, maximise value of collective learning in project teams, integrate KM into daily
workflow and longterm planning, deliver innovative solutions to customers in a sustainable
manner, and make the organisation an attractive choice for knowledge workers
 
The initial knowledge audit was driven by the “8 Cs” framework
(http://bit.ly/dBbBkl background: I was the external KM consultant at Perot Systems):
connectivity, content, community, capacity, culture, cooperation, commerce, capital.
 
“KM has helped our project management performance,” explained Shobha, who also has a
chapter on this topic in a forthcoming KM book. KM in projects helped build
testimonials/credentials for customers (new services as well as upselling/cross-selling).
 
“We created part-time roles for each project called Knowledge Champions, chosen by project
managers,” Shobha explained. Knowledge Champions received induction kits about expertise
mapping, facilitating knowledge sharing sessions, preparing case studies, and focusing on
reusability and innovation.
 
Dimensions of KM in project ecosystems include: methodology, technology, applications,
domain knowledge, customer knowledge, and project management. Different kinds of projects in
varying environments - product, services, maintenance – entail different flavours of KM. KM has
proven to be useful at all project phases in Dell: feasibility analysis, initiation, planning,
execution, and closure – including case studies, best practices, expertise maps and reusable
artefacts.
 
KM has helped create a perception shift in the way in which project and service managers were
regarded: delivery heads (knowledge leaders), project leads (knowledge champions), team
member (knowledge workers).
 
The company’s portal is called K-Edge, and there are 30 CoPs, some of which involve customers
in co-creation of knowledge assets and the KM plan. Dell also has an ideas management tool
with a number of “thumbs up or thumbs down” features for rating and validating innovations.
KM metrics and assessment include percentages of employees involved in different kinds of
knowledge activities.
 
Leadership plays different roles in different stages of knowledge maturity, explained Shobha:
“You need strong initial support of organisational leaders for launch. Then you need to explain
RoI to them!”
 
The initiative is 30 months old now, and KM is a part of project compliance. “The company has
quarterly Knowledge Champion conclaves. Many went on to become better project managers.
More employees want to become Knowledge Champions,” she explained. KM success factors
include investment and perseverance, Shobha summed up.