KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

What is knowledge ?

Pieter Labuschagne

Copyright (2006)

Smashwords Edition

License Notes

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 ebook with another person, please download an additional copy. Thank

you for respecting the work of the author.

An implementation guide to KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

1. This eBook is based on my personal experience and knowledge gained during the implementation process of Knowledge Management initiatives.

2. Many references will be made in this publication and I will endeavour to acknowledge all of them. Should I happen to miss some, please forgive me for the unintentional lapse of memory. Contact me, I'll be happy to set the record straight.

3. This publication is done in the true spirit of knowledge sharing. Please be so kind to acknowledge relevant sources and share your knowledge gained.

4. Have a look at http://knowman.net

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Pieter Labuschagne was part of the Knowledge Management implementation team of a major mining company and, as Project Manager, soon experienced the benefits of this initiative. He realised that as soon as one can see through the hype and academic speak, Knowledge Management in practice has major benefits, both production wise as well as employee morale wise.

With this eBook, Pieter wants to talk to the reader as a fellow business partner who have seen KM works and understands the language of man. Enjoy this book and even if you don't do anything about KM in your business, you will at least know what could have been done to improve your "bottom-line" and improved employee morale !

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. FAD OR FICTION

3. WHAT NEW RULES

4. WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE

5. WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

6. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT vs INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

7. THE KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENT

8. A GOLFING ANALOGY

9. CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT LEADERS

10. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT STORIES

11. WHERETO NOW

12. AM I READY?

1.

INTRODUCTION

Welcome to Knowledge Management and the implementation thereof in your business. This guide will give you an overview of what we understand the concept of Knowledge is. As you might know, it is crucial to understand Knowledge before we could even start to manage it. I will discuss what I understand what knowledge is and how I use the Knowledge Management processes to manage and measure the knowledge locked away in our intellectual - and knowledge-based assets. A successful Knowledge Management initiative will convert the tacit knowledge existing in our businesses into explicit knowledge with the benefits associated with this.

The very first thing that we must understand, and subscribe to, if we want knowledge management to succeed for us, is the fact that no-one is, nor can be, an expert in everything. To succeed, we must start with the assumption that somebody, somewhere, and somehow has already done what we are trying to do. All that we need to do then is to find out whom and then learn from them. Only then can we be innovative and creative.

To benefit from our intellectual- and knowledge-based assets (human assets, and there might be more than you think !), we must implement a change in (work)ethics and show these individuals the benefits to be derived from sharing knowledge. If this knowledge is tacit knowledge, we might start talking of that stuff that we do not even know we know. Now, this is the knowledge that we need to convert into explicit knowledge.

This eBook will hopefully assist you in understanding what Knowledge is all about. Successful implementation really starts with a solid understanding of the Knowledge concept. Only after this concept is understood, can we attempt your Knowledge Management implementation.

The main objective of this book on Knowledge Management is to sensitise business about the value of the knowledge "hidden" in their business environment and how to identify, retrieve and apply this knowledge for continuous business improvement.

2.

FAD OR FICTION ?

There is scepticism about knowledge management among a fair number of senior managers in both the private and public sectors, who feel it is a passing fad. It is instructive, however, to look at how some other one-time "fads" have evolved. There are few organisations today that do not practice Total Quality Management (TQM) or Continuous Improvement, at least in some form. Quality, consistency and reliability have become embedded in all their services, products, projects and processes. Similarly, most organisations have introduced some form of Business Process Re-engineering (BPR). Like-wise, just about every organisation today must consider e-business and its impact on its operations, processes, technologies and strategies.

All of these concepts, unlike passing fads, have matured into a set of desirable management practices, which in turn have stimulated a thriving industry for experts or suppliers of tools, techniques, training and other services. Because of its fundamental importance, there is every likelihood that knowledge management will do the same if properly applied.

Although KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT as an initiative is being discussed and thrown around between managers and supervisors for many years, it seldom came to its right because of this inability to "cross the big divide". It is absolutely amazing to notice how many good incentives and proposals never advances through the theory phase because of the human nature to only theorize and never actualize ! It is often much easier to "talk about" than "do about" !

Academics and consultants go around to companies telling us how well we can run our business by using all these wonderful ideas and tools to improve our business by getting tasks done easier, quicker and better. If they can only then assist us to get the job done ! Somebody must take this theory and put this theory into practice and show us the action required.

Maybe this is where knowledge management starts ! Getting this tacit knowledge (theory) converted to explicit knowledge (action) is the basic premise of knowledge management.

Why we do need to retain the knowledge of our experienced employees might not always be that obvious to business owners, as knowledge can always be either bought or re-learned. Both are expensive options ! Think also about the legacy of re-engineering or downsizing (a.k.a rightsizing) which has resulted in a serious brain drain for many organisations. Brain drain takes two basic forms:

- Experienced people leave voluntary- Experienced people are retrenched as part of an across-the-board downsizing initiative or, as in

the case of South Africa, part of an affirmative action/employment equity initiative.

Many "experts" leave the organisations through voluntary retrenchment or severance packages. The problem is that often the best people are the ones who take advantage of these programs, taking with them critical knowledge and skills.

Downsizing is the major cause of the demise of middle management. Middle Managers have been widely considered the "fatty layer" between the Shop Floor and Senior Management that should be dieted out. However, as you might know by now, now that the consultant has left, the key role of middle managers was to create meaning (or knowledge) from the information gathered at the shop floor, a task that senior management neither has the time nor the appropriate perspective to do well.

Nonaka and Takeuchi describe the dilemma of the vanishing middle manager in "The Knowledge-Creating Company". Sandwiched between senior management and the frontline workers, middle managers performed more than the critical tasks of binding the top and bottom of the company. They tie the organisation together horizontally by looking for opportunities to leverage skills, methodologies and capabilities, also known as "organizational knowledge". Now that "middle management" is out, it is not surprising that "knowledge management" is in!

Knowledge Management represents an effort to repair past damage and an insurance policy against loss of organizational memory in the future.

Let's quickly discuss the "labeling" issue. We, in general, use the term "Knowledge Management" to describe the area in which we work. Now, there are some people who take us on in saying that we are trying to take control of their knowledge. It is worth taking some time in advance with your employees, at least, to select the most appropriate term.

Labels to use might be e.g. "Continuous Improvement", "Organisational Learning", "Knowledge Sharing" or even "Working Smarter". As long as everybody understands the concept, the label does not matter. Maybe there might not be even a need for a label ! Do not allow words to get in the way and become a barrier to your success.

Terry Volkwyn, CEO of Primedia Broadcasting received her "Boss of the Year" award with the following remark:

"Knowledge is not power unless you use it, share it and achieve the right objectives from this use. Successful leaders see knowledge as a gift and are compelled to share it - they do not abdicate their leadership responsibility to experts.”

3.

WHAT NEW RULES ?

We must understand that we are not in the same business, whatever we thought that might be, than a couple of years ago. The business world is changing and is continuing this change. Take the leap, get onto this Change Bus and grow your business. The alternative is a deadly one. Ignore these changes and you will ruin your business, guaranteed ! That is fact, if you do not move forward with the rest of the business world, you will stagnate and die a lonely death. Sounds sordid, but that is it ......

Carol Ginsey Gorman describes the new rules in her book, "Ghost Story: A Modern Business Fable". Following is a synopsis of these new rules and as we might discuss them as we go along, it might be a good idea to look at them and start knowing them as they will forever play a role in your business life.

Rule 1: Knowledge is not like GOLD, it is more like MILKRule 2: You can't win if you don't know that the rules have changed.Rule 3: Knowledge is not power - sharing knowledge is power.Rule 4: Nobody knows everything, so nobody can win alone.Rule 5: There is always more than one right answer to any challenge.Rule 6: If you fail and don't learn from it, everybody loses.Rule 7: If you win and don't tell others how you did it, everybody else still loses.Rule 8: You can't share knowledge you don't know you have.Rule 9: Everybody has something to contribute, even if they don't know it.Rule 10: Don't be afraid to trust each other.Rule 11: Don't be afraid to trust yourself.

Take note of these rules. I am sure that some seems familiar and you might know some of them, you just don't think about them so often. There might be some angle attached to some of them that makes you somewhat uncomfortable, like Rules 5 and 7, and what about Rules 10 and 11 !

In the mean time, fasten those safety belts !

4.

WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE ?

Observe Figure 1 (below) for a moment. As you work your way up to the top of the model, there are certain actions and interventions that should happen. DATA is everywhere, but, as you know, means nothing if it is not put into context. DATA is a set of discrete, objective facts about events. Put into context and it becomes INFORMATION. This information is more helpful in the work situation than the raw data (without the context applied). Think of INFORMATION as data that makes a difference.

If this information can acquire some meaning and it becomes relevant, we gained some KNOWLEDGE. And this is where we often stop. We think that we now have the knowledge and that this is enough to be productive.

The question now remains, what can we do to this knowledge to improve the value of the knowledge. How do we re-work that knowledge to ensure that we can make the most of the knowledge with regards to our business processes? What we now need is WISDOM.If you can use that knowledge and add some insight to this knowledge, you end up with the required WISDOM. By continually processing the knowledge, especially the tacit knowledge, and convert all knowledge to explicit knowledge, we can start sharing this knowledge and wisdom and ensure an optimal business environment. Have a look at the Figure 2 and let us discuss the practicality around this example.

Take a flight from Johannesburg to Kimberley for instance. The data should be all there and might seem superfluous. I need an aeroplane, two pilots, a place of departure and a place of arrival. My reservation agent will forward me an e-mail, indicating the data with some context added and the information passed on reads as follows:

Flight SA1107, 23 May 2006,Dep - 17:45 Arr - 19:05

Now this should be fine with most travellers, especially if you travel this route regularly. But guess what? I certainly could use a bit more meaning so that this information can become knowledge. I need to know that this flight departs from Terminal 7 and that you need to be at the gate 45 minutes before departure for example. Now, you are correct when you reckon that this knowledge should be enough to get me from Johannesburg to Kimberley.

Let us now add some insight to this knowledge ! Talking to some friends that travel this route regularly, I know that it is also possible to drop off the rental car at the gate if arranged. A saving of 20 minutes. I also know, from my friends, that a business lounge is available with an Internet "hot-spot" where I can do some work while waiting for the flight. I also know that it might be better to book the earlier flight as traffic congestion is much less when taking the earlier flight. I also know that using the "sky-trolley" will save time waiting for the baggage retrieval.

Can you understand what this sharing of information did to my trip ? Major time-saving, a productive waiting period (more time with the family tonight !) and a more relaxed passenger.

While waiting, I also heard from a crew member that upgrading to first class might also getting me seated quicker and fast-tracked off the flight at the arrival point.

You can be sure that this bit of wisdom will be fed back into the knowledge pool to be disseminated to other travellers. The knowledge I now have is related to the data, but much richer and enabled me to make some decisions. We now need to manage this knowledge to ensure it is applied or at least available to be applied.

I can hear your question already: “What if the knowledge, getting ‘reworked’ all the time gets to its limits ?” This can happen and we call it “Technical limits”. This is the time, if it did not happen already, where innovation takes the front stage and the knowledge workers go past the application of knowledge, to the invention of something new !

The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines Knowledge as "familiarity gained by experience". Often the terms "Knowledge" and "Know-how" are used in the same sense. It might be so that these two terms mean the same, but there are actually many other attributes what could be considered as Knowledge.

Know-how is basically only the processes, procedures, techniques and tools you use to get the job done. Knowledge, on the other hand, combine the Know-why, the Know-what, the Know-who, the Know-where and the Know-when.

Let us have a look at these briefly, just to make you understand what we mean when we talk about the "tacitness" of knowledge:

- Know Why relates to strategic insight - understanding the context of your role, the value of your actions. Getting the "bigger" picture.

- Know What relates to the activities to complete a task

- Know Who includes the knowledge about relationships, contacts, networks, who to call for assistance and advice

- Know Where relates to that uncanny ability to navigate through and find information. Human search engines.

- Know When the sense of timing, knowing the best time to do something, to make a decision, to stop something.

There are generally three types of knowledge that we are concerned about. Figure 3, herewith, shows the relevance of these types of knowledge and why it is crucial to see "what is under the water"

Explicit Knowledge is knowledge that is written, codified and stored where this knowledge is easily retrieved and used/applied.

Conscious Tacit Knowledge is the things that you know you know and, if asked, might tell others. It is individualised.

Unconscious Tacit Knowledge is deep knowledge you don't know you know. It is often also described as instinct or "gut-feel“.

One of the most important concepts in Knowledge Management is the distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge can be held in people's heads while Explicit knowledge can be written down. Explicit knowledge can therefore be stored and searched and often is a good catalyst for establishing people networks. Explicit knowledge is also described as knowledge that individuals find easy to express using language and other forms of communication - sound, visuals and movement.

Many KM practitioners often equate explicit knowledge to information.

Tacit knowledge, therefore, can be described as knowledge that an individual is unable to articulate and thus convert into information. Tacit knowledge is more useful to any organisation if it is converted into information (explicit knowledge) and then transferred to others so that they too can use it.

It is therefore clear that when we want to use or apply knowledge, it has to be explicit.

Knowledge Management

then involves capturing (tacit) knowledge

and using knowledge processes

to convert this (tacit knowledge)

into explicit knowledge

for use by others.

The challenge inherent with tacit knowledge is figuring out how to recognize, generate, share and manage it. While Information Technology, in the form of e-mail and related technologies, can help facilitate the dissemination of tacit knowledge, identifying tacit knowledge in the first place is a major hurdle for most organisations.

"Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experiences, values, contextual information and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It

originates and is applied in the mind of knowers. In organisations, it often becomes embedded, not only in documents or repositories, but also in organizational routines, processes, practices and

norms."- "Working Knowledge",

Davenport & Prusak, HBS Press, 1998

5.

WHAT IS

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ?

There's no universal definition of Knowledge Management, just as there's no agreement as to what constitutes knowledge in the first place.

For this reason, it's best to think of Knowledge Management in the broadest context.

Knowledge Management is the process through which organisations generate value from their intellectual and knowledge-based assets.

Most often, generating value from such assets involves sharing them among employees, departments, vendors, customers and even with other companies in an effort to devise best practices.

It's important to note that the definition says nothing about technology. Knowledge Management initiatives are often left for the Information Technology guys to implement. Why ? Is it because they provide the tools to store the captured knowledge ? Is it because the word "information" is in their job title ? Is it because they might want to show you their search engines and websites at work ? There might be many reasons offered, but Knowledge Management is definitely not department-based or departmentalised.

Knowledge Management is often facilitated by Information Technology, technology by itself is not Knowledge Management.

Knowledge Management helps people to learn through sharing knowledge, and therefore expands a person's capacity to contribute to the performance of the organisation or company.

By capturing and recording the knowledge of people and teams, an organisation is able to carry learning forward and continue to improve.

A last word on this, DO NOT implement Knowledge Management in only one department and think that it will be enough. It will not be enough.

Knowledge Management is built around knowledge sharing and capturing across all levels of work. There are often more knowledge floating around those areas you least expected.

So, by now we know that there are two types of knowledge, explicit and tacit, and that we need to convert the tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge.

Both forms of knowledge are critical to any business and Knowledge Management is concerned with sharing both types. Many organisations stop at the sharing but never apply the sharing.

Knowledge Management is, basically, concerned about two main areas:

- Helping knowers share what they know they know, and

- Helping knowers articulate and share what they do not know they know.

There are many processes and tools available that organisations can use, both people- and technology orientated, to share explicit knowledge.

Organisations often call "turning tacit- into explicit knowledge", knowledge management.

These organisations typically try their utmost to get people to share what they know they know, but have not bothered to share. There are often much more involved that meets the eye when people do not share, and it is not always a time issue !

Identifying and removing these barriers, together with deploying the tools end creating the environment, is an important part of a successful Knowledge Management initiative.

Experts in your organisation often struggle to explain their daily routines and way of thinking in performing daily tasks.

You might be an expert in, say, walking. Can you easily describe this natural action (to you) of walking to somebody not familiar with the action of walking ?

Bringing this kind of knowledge to a more conscious level to enable the sharing thereof is often an unfamiliar process when an expert tries to understand what have been learned from a particular work experience.

Getting experts to articulate unknown knowledge requires skilled observation, facilitation and interviewing techniques as well as an ability to codify the knowledge in a form others can understand and apply.

Converting the knowledge, however, is NOT the same as transferring the knowledge. These transfers must often happen, especially in the beginning, on a very conscious level and will require effort from your Knowledge Management champions.

Eventually, this transfer effort might become more transparent and more like "a way we do work around here“.

6.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

versus

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

Why is there this confusion between Information Management and Knowledge Management ? Not to even talk about Document Management ! Let me try to illustrate the differences as I see them from a Knowledge Management perspective.

One of the key premises offered here is that tacit - and explicit knowledge are not the same knowledge in a different state. Traditionally, Information Management has not taken into account how people learn, create, validate, codify, share knowledge and make decisions. Its focus has been on the manipulation of data and information. Conversely, Knowledge Management has a much broader ambition. We will discuss here not only how Knowledge Management and Information Management are different or similar, but also how and why these two disciplines intersect.

The risks involved in Knowledge Management projects that do not clearly take these differences into account are also highlighted here. The information offered here is based on my own experiences with Knowledge Management initiatives as an IT Manager.

People, often these days, are very keen to say that knowledge is the most critical asset to be managed. Why is it then that not many people - particularly not practitioners - invest time in learning about what knowledge really is and how different Knowledge Management is from Information Management ? Particularly IM-focused individuals (yes, that includes IT Managers!) or software vendors tend to treat Information Management and Knowledge Management as the same thing. However, the very act of managing and management science itself can be seen, to a large extent, as the application of human knowledge in an organisational context to achieve desired outcomes. Thus, managing knowledge can be defined very narrowly or broadly depending on a person's specific goals or perspective.

A narrow definition of Knowledge Management is usually associated with the deployment of Information Management systems, while broad definitions are usually associated with the softer side of management such as leadership style, organizational culture, rewards and recognition programs, etc. We will argue, therefore, that despite the growing focus on Information Management systems, as a key enabler of Knowledge Management, Knowledge Management as an emerging discipline depends on the fusion of the contributions of many (all) disciplines, including philosophy, psychology, sociology, management and economics that until recently did not cross paths.

Key Differences Between Information- and Knowledge Management

The differences between Information Management and Knowledge Management can be analysed according to four different dimensions:

• Interplay between Information and Knowledge

• Information Management and Knowledge Management Projects: different scopes, approaches and measurement systems

• Organisational Learning and Knowledge Management

• Protecting Intellectual Capital: Information Management and Knowledge Management Perspectives

Interplay between Information and Knowledge

From a management perspective the key difference between information and knowledge is that information is much more easily identified, organised and distributed. Knowledge, on the other hand, cannot really be managed because it resides in one's mind. Thus, Knowledge Management is essentially limited to creating the right conditions for individuals to learn and apply their knowledge to the benefit of the organisation. The application of one's knowledge can, hopefully, be translated into relevant information that is shared and used for new products and actions, like projects, that create value.

A very interesting perspective that clearly distinguishes Knowledge Management from Information Management has been offered by Von Krogh, Ichijo and Nonaka (2000). These authors built upon Nonaka's initial work and put forward the idea that it is not possible to manage knowledge. According to their view, one can only prepare, and hopefully positively affect the knowledge creation process through many managerial actions and decisions.

The point they are trying to make, is not the deployment of sophisticated information technology, but the facilitation of conversations locally and increasingly among people in different locations (see my musings on herding cats !). Thus, Knowledge Management is about supporting conversations and supporting a humanistic perspective of work.

It is also, eventually, deeply ingrained in the values of the organisation since knowledge in their opinion is also true and justified belief. It is clear for me then, that the perspective offered by these authors highlights another key difference between Information Management and Knowledge Management and clarify the following:

• Information Management is usually not concerned with the actual process of knowledge-creation or innovation.

• Any Knowledge Management effort, however, has structured processes in place to ensure the capturing, sharing and application of the knowledge on offer.

• Knowledge Management systems are necessarily much more human-centric than Information Management systems or initiatives. Thus, Knowledge Management practitioners must recognize that increasing the richness and quality of the available information sources and the interpretative capacity of employees is far more desirable than simply increasing the quantity of information available.

• Information per se can be meaningless and irrelevant without proper context.

Thus, two of the main concerns of Knowledge Management (and traditionally not of information management) should be:

• the provision of context for and validation of available information and

• increasing the connections among people (who have knowledge) that would likely not occur without the help of a Knowledge Management process.

With these goals in mind, context about the main information sources (especially unstructured information) is significantly enriched by including additional details such as :

• Who created the information;

• What is the background of the knowledge suppliers; Where and when was this knowledge created;

• How long will the information be relevant, valid and accurate; Who validated the information;

• Who else might be interested or has similar knowledge; Where was it applied or proved to be useful;

• What other sources of information are closely related;

• How to test some of the concepts (e.g. through templates and simulation).

- (Terra & Gordon, 2002)

Organisational Learning and Knowledge Management

Many people will tell you that, at least theoretical, the Knowledge Management discipline is a direct inheritor of the organisational learning field. Many will also tell you that individuals and organisation learn through self-knowledge, dialogue, openness and systems-thinking. The main difference between knowledge and learning is (according to Keating, Robinson and Clemsey, 1998) that Knowledge (what we know and what we can do) indicates a state and, therefore, potential for action and decision while Learning refers to any change in a given knowledge state.

Knowledge can be seen as "stock" and learning then the "flow" of knowledge. The competitiveness of any organisation depends on its current stock of knowledge and on the flow of individual and/or organisational knowledge. The type of industry (of the organisation) and the nature of work being done will indicate where the emphasis should be, either on the "stock" or the "flow" of knowledge.

In stable markets and where work tasks tend to be repetitive, Knowledge Management's primary goal should be to effectively re-use existing knowledge that has been converted from tacit to explicit (detailed and captured information). Where the competition is innovation-driven and the work tasks more varied, emphasis on the "flow" of knowledge should deliver better results.

Protecting Intellectual Capital

There are also very important differences between Information - and Knowledge Management when it comes to strategies for protecting valuable intellectual capital.

An Information Management perspective will lead organisations to put too much emphasis on the physical factors (firewalls, badges, cameras, authorisation levels, etc). Although these measures are often of the utmost importance, it is a well-known fact that the truly important knowledge resides in people's heads. An active and systematic protection strategy for this knowledge should be activated.

It does not matter what the academics say, but there are only two types of strategies to protect this type of knowledge: retention policies and circulation of knowledge.

Retention policies are clearly understood. Circulation of knowledge strategies relate to actively developing mentoring (helping new employees learn from "old hands") and fostering teamwork and Communities of Practice. Organisations must ensure that employees develop knowledge collectively and thereby reducing the potential of losing knowledge suddenly by the departing of a particular employee.

In Conclusion

Knowledge as an asset or resource, unlike information or data, is not easily understood, shared, classified and measured, Knowledge is invisible, intangible and difficult to imitate. Expanding an organisation knowledge base is not the same as expanding its information base.

Although we now have highlighted the differences between Knowledge Management and Information Management, it remains to be said: Knowledge Management is reliant on Information Management for its existence. Technology is crucial in the mining of knowledge, the capturing of knowledge, the dissemination of knowledge, the sharing of knowledge and often the application of knowledge. Knowledge Management can not exist without Information Management.

If we talk again about Knowledge Management, do not ask me what "system" we are using to manage knowledge !

7.

THE KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENT

Somebody once said that managing knowledge is like herding cats. And how true is that as I often experienced. Can you imagine standing in a field with some cats and trying to get them all, together, into the center ? A bit of a problem, as you could imagine !

So how can we do this ? How could you get these cats to do what you want them to do ? Yes, you are right when you look at the title of this section and suggest that we create the right environment.

In the cat scenario it might be easier than you think. A couple of well placed fireplaces, some scratch poles, some food or saucers of milk and balls of wool or other toys might entice your cats to spend some time together in the center of your field. How long you can keep them together and interested all depends on the "satisfaction" they get. We have to deploy the correct and applicable components to make up the right environment.

To manage knowledge we must also deploy the correct and applicable components to create the right environment. Now, what should the right environment be then ? This environment, I believe, should be an environment in which knowledge can be discovered (mined), shared, created, distilled, verified/validated, captured, transferred and, most important, applied. So what are the most obvious components in need ?

- the right conditions: We firstly need a standard or common and reliable infrastructure. This infrastructure will include resources (some dedicated) and an organisational leadership that is willing to be entrepreneurial with the associated support structures in place.

- the right means: The model, tools, techniques and processes must be standard and agreed on.- the right action: People must instinctively share, seek and apply knowledge.

There might be more components to explore, but these should suffice for now. Without any of the above, you will not succeed in your efforts to manage the knowledge in your organisation.

Organisations, today, are all thinking "out of the box" even if they just utter the words ! Relying on our "boxes" is why we are efficient and effective, and that is why it so difficult to "think out of the box" ! Now, can you imagine what will happen to an organisation's profitability if everyone is thinking "out of the box" ! The key is to create space and time for experimentation that permits creative and innovative ideas to flourish without disrupting the operation of the organisation until the disruption is desired.

Think about the following metaphor, as described by David Miller. Imagine if a bicycle wheel is either too tightly or too loosely screwed to its frame. A tight fit does not allow the wheel to turn, while a loose fit makes the wheel wobble.

However, when the screw is fitted correctly, there is sufficient "play" between the wheel and the frame to permit the whole assembly to work. There should be some handle/control on the play being fostered in the organisation. What makes this concept even worse is that the word "play" stood in stark contrast with the idea of "work" ! Yet, an organisation's acceptance and the subsequent promotion of play with its associated experimentation and failure are

important precursors to successful innovations. Without play and the required flexibility, organisations either get stuck in old (and comfortable) routines or chaotically drift from one new fad to another.

I can tell you many success stories about innovative play that rescued organisations. The most famous one, I reckon, must be the Canon story. The engineers at Canon got logjammed on the disposable drum challenges. The teamleader of the design team, at one of the brainstorm sessions, sent for some beers during another point of getting no-where. Sitting down with the beers, the teamleader held up a beer can and playfully suggest that the team should ponder the similarities between an inexpensive beer can and an inexpensive copier drum.

If this exercise is well facilitated and carefully orchestrated, this light-hearted element of the exercise can assist the participants in thinking analogously and climbing out of the box and view the challenge from a different perspective.

We all know the result of this play exercise. This Canon story just highlights the significance of allowing activity that, despite its ultimate aim of solving a business challenge, can often feel like a meandering, irrelevant exercise.

More modest, but just as effective, are some other techniques employed. Think about the agendaless meeting, mindmapping sessions, casual dress and informal settings that are often used to break down "barriers" and levelling the playing field among participants who might operate in different hierarchical positions otherwise. Toys, role-playing, games story-telling and simulations are now being adopted as business tools for helping people connect with all the skills that they possess for problem-solving and creativity.

If the above can lead to better business and more motivated, innovative employees, let's play !

8.

A GOLFING ANALOGY

As Knowledge Management has its basis in storytelling, let me tell you a story to drive the Knowledge Management concept home. It is a golfing story and I therefore will assume that most of the readers will have a good understanding of this analogy.

Think of a golf caddie as a simplified example of a knowledge worker. A caddie is paid to do his work and his job description states that it is his responsibility to carry the golf bag holding the golf clubs and other golfing paraphernalia that golfers carry with them. Most caddies will also keep an eye on your wayward balls and assist you in your search for them off the fairway. That is what he is paid to do and you cannot penalise him for doing these tasks well. As a matter of fact, you might be expected to give him a performance bonus if he is doing this well. Equate now this caddie with an employee in your organisation.

Now, good caddies do more than carry clubs and track down wayward balls. When asked, a good caddie will give advice to golfers, such as, "The wind makes the seventh hole play 15 yards longer." Suddenly, this advice, if accepted and applied, will make it easier for the golfer, another employee with a Key Performance Area (KPA) of shooting 82 today, to achieve his KPA. Did you notice what happened here ?

In a Knowledge Management environment, we must be prepared to ask the questions, we must be prepared to share what we know we know, we must evaluate and apply the acquired knowledge.

What is still missing? The tacit knowledge identified, was not captured and converted to explicit knowledge which means that when we play here again in these conditions, we will have forgotten about the wind impact and make the same mistake again on the seventh.

As in the work environment, we will think, "Of course I will remember this when I play here again." Mistake !

What did the knower (caddie) gain from his knowledge sharing ? Accurate advice may lead to a bigger tip at the end of the day. Now, this reward might urge him to share again, share more and share easier. If a good caddie is willing to share what he knows with other caddies, then they all may eventually earn bigger tips.

On the flip side, the knowledge seeker (golfer) - having derived a benefit from the caddie's advice - may be more likely to play that course again. The golfer enjoyed his work as he achieved his KPA easier and with less effort. He actually can't wait until next Saturday to play again, he might make a plan to get out again on Wednesday ! A positive change in attitude towards his work, I would say.

How would Knowledge Management work to make this happen? The caddie master (supervisor/middle management) may decide to reward caddies for sharing their tips by offering them credits for pro shop merchandise. A notice board might be erected in the caddyshack where notes and remarks are penned for collation later on. Once the best advice is collected, the course manager (Knowledge Manager) would publish the information in notebooks (or make it available on PDAs and Smartphones), and distribute them to all the

caddies. These we will call Knowledge Assets. These Knowledge Assets will be the repositories of the converted tacit knowledge which is now explicit knowledge, ready to be understood and applied by others.

The end result of a well-designed Knowledge Management program is that everyone wins. In this case, caddies (knowers) get bigger tips and deals on merchandise while glowing in the glory of the golfers' praise and appreciation, golfers (employees and knowledge seekers) play better because they benefit from the collective experience of caddies, and the course owners (business owners) win because better scores lead to more repeat business.

9.

CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT LEADERS

What are the characteristics that distinguish organisations who are leaders in Knowledge Management and those who are less successful or even failing in their knowledge initiatives? In research for Creating the Knowledge-based Business the ten recurring characteristics that separated the leaders and the laggards were identified. The report also illustrates these characteristics through case studies of 33 knowledge leaders.

Ten Characteristics of Leaders

1. They have a clearly articulated vision of what the knowledge agenda and knowledge management is about. Their thinking about their business, their business environment and their knowledge goals was clear.

2. They have enthusiastic knowledge champions who are supported by top management.

3. They have a holistic perspective that embraces strategic, technological and organisational perspectives.

4. They use systematic processes and frameworks (the power of visualisation).

5. They "bet on knowledge", even when the cost-benefits cannot easily be measured.

6. They use effective communications, using all the tricks of marketing and PR.

7. There is effective interaction at all levels with their customers and external experts. Human networking takes place internally and externally on a broad front.

8. They demonstrate good teamwork, with team members drawn from many disciplines.

9. They have a culture of openness and inquisitiveness that stimulates innovation and learning.

10. They develop incentives, sanctions and personal development programmes to change behaviours.

Ten Characteristics of Laggards

1. They simplify knowledge to information or database model, often applying the 'knowledge' label without a comprehensive understanding of what knowledge is about.

2. They package and disseminate knowledge that is most readily available (vs. that which is the most useful).

3. They work in isolated pockets without strong senior management support. Thus, they may hand over responsibility for knowledge systems to one department, such as IT, without engaging the whole organisation.

4. They focus on a narrow aspect of knowledge, such as knowledge sharing rather than all processes including new knowledge creation and innovation.

5. They blindly follow a change process e.g. BPR, without understanding the associated knowledge dimension.

6. They downsize or outsource without appreciating what vital knowledge might be lost.

7. They think that technology (alone) is the answer. For example, that expert systems by themselves are the way to organise and use knowledge.

8. They have a major cultural blockage, perhaps caused by a climate of "knowledge is power"

9. They "know all the answers" i.e. they are not open to new ideas and innovation.

10. They get impatient. They think knowledge management is simply another short-term project or programme. They do not allow time for new systems and behaviours to become embedded.

10.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT STORIES

There are many stories to be told about the impact of Knowledge Management interventions on various businesses and their operations. I am sure that there are some interventions that did not have any immediate impact on the business operation addressed, but I am still to observe those.

As it is very difficult to measure Knowledge Management, it is also often difficult to indicate this impact of an intervention. It is also, unfortunately, a fact that basically everything in a business is measured with a monetary value !

The stories I will share with you is not derived from another Knowledge Worker or read about in some publication. These stories are from experiences that I was involved in and facilitated myself. I will refrain from divulging specific information about the business or operation but you are welcome to contact me for references.

The first story concerns a brand-new metallurgical plant constructed to treat underground material as well as dump (fine) material. It was a plant riddled with new technology and replacing a plant operated by a workforce of 400+ workers.

Automation was paramount in the design criteria as the plant was planned to run a Continuos Operations shift with only 40 operators in attendance.

Maintenance was planned to happen on a quarterly maintenance shift basis. The Project Plan proposed a budget of ZAR600 miilion (US$100 million) and construction would take 18 months.

The Project Team was appointed and they were regarded (mostly by themselves !) as the "untouchables". Typically, they flew a bit higher than the rest and were a touch out of reach to the rest. They also often forgot to look down as they fly and missed many suggestions and advice from the rest. This is nothing new as I am sure you are all very aware of.

Yes, you guessed it. The minimum of knowledge sharing was encouraged and no processes were applied to manage the knowledge in the business or elsewhere.

The result was to be expected: - Project budget doubled, project deadlines slipped drastically, employee morale deflated dramatically and worst of all, the business was not getting the revenue expected from a functional facility.

Many people said this was normal and comments such as "This is normal, it is just like any other project !" was brandied around as this was not really a big issue.

As it happened, the Knowledge Management initiative was just launched and it was then suggested that a Knowledge Management intervention be applied to the "ramp-up" problems experienced with this new plant.

In conjunction with the Knowledge Management implementation team, it was decided to do this Knowledge Management intervention as a pilot for the Knowledge Management

implementation project. The company decided to have a Peer Assist on the Ramp-up process.

The impact of KM interventions on the "Ramp-up"

process of a Metallurgical Plant.

An Away-team was invited and the Peer Assist process was facilitated over a period of 3-days.

As expected, the project team started very reluctantly sharing and listening during the process but it did not take long for them to realise the value obtained from the process.

Although the result of a Knowledge Management intervention is always a Knowledge Asset, the project team devised some solutions on the fly and they immediately started implementation of these knowledge gained.

A Knowledge Asset was presented and the result/s can be observed from the graph above.

Needless to say, Knowledge Management was sold to the Project Team !

In my next story, I will share with you the effect an After Action Review can have on a maintenance task that was performed at a mineral plant. The changing of screens in a plant is a fairly routine operation and one would have thought done to perfection by now......

In this case there were time budgeted for the change of the screens, eight in total, which meant no production during this activity. As you will probably know, no production means no revenue.

With the replacement plan, it was decided to do one screen at a time and 172 hours were budgeted for the first screen replacement project. The usual problems occurred and was handled on-the-fly as usual. The replacement was seen as fairly successful as the time-budget was only extended by 12 hours. a mere 6 % !

An After Action Review was planned and scheduled to happen before the second screen was replaced. During this KM intervention the usual problems were discussed, but for one improvement. This time a Knowledge Asset was created with all the knowledge gained documented and distributed. This new knowledge was then carried on the second screen replacement. Again, as usual, 172 hours were budgeted for this activity.

Suddenly, the usual problems did not seem to rear their heads. And when they did it was so easy to handle ! This time the screen replacement activity took only 87 hours ! Was this possible ?

The team raced to the next After Action Review to discuss what happened. And, of course, this time the focus was on what worked well and how this can be maintained. The Knowledge Asset was updated with this new knowledge and reworked wisdom. Morale was high and the team couldn't wait for the next screen replacement activity.

Well, you can see from the graph on this page the results. Needless to say, the Management Team was excited, the Finance Manager over the moon and the project team blooming with the performance bonuses in their pockets !

And of course, the rest of the operation saw this results and started implementation of the KM processes immediately.

As you might notice, a “technical limit” has been reached and further application of reworking the knowledge derived in this case was not applicable. The knowledge workers switched over to innovation mode and devised a tool to swap out these screens with minimal human intervention.

The tool was patented, the “manual” swapping of screens was automated, and downtime was minimised while the production stream operated continuously with the resultant increase in revenue.

11.

WHERE-TO NOW ?

Now that you have most, if not all, of the information regarding knowledge and decided that you must manage this knowledge, you still need to decide what next.

Have a look at the diagram, plotting amount of effort required versus time.

It must be obvious to you by now that the goal must be that all stakeholders in your business must be a knowledge worker. This actually means that all should know about Knowledge Management and what the reasons therefore are. It is, again, necessary to emphasize that "all" in this case means all the employees, customers, suppliers, management and others involved in your business. You might also find that the very first thing to do might be a change management exercise ! It is a difficult concept to grasp if you grew up and got old living in a world where what you (and only you !) know was a sure recipe for success, if only for yourself.

The unconscious competence block (bottom right) say "that's the way we do work around here". This is where your knowledge workers will be in time. It will not happen overnight and it will cost you in the beginning. But can you imagine the benefits accrued, without the effort ? The challenge is, according to the diagram, to move from unconscious incompetence to conscious incompetence and then on to conscious competence to end up with effortless unconscious competence.

As you move from the bottom left-hand corner of the diagram, you will still be in that "ignorance is bliss" state of mind. You might not managing the knowledge in your business, but it never occurred to you that it is a problem. Neither did it occur to you that you should be concerned ! You are incompetent and you are not aware you are.

The second block is probably where you are right now. You now know and are probably aware that your business is incompetent to manage the knowledge available. You also now can see there is a bit more effort required to do something about your incompetence.

The third block is where you soon will be. Accomplished knowledge workers. You still have to work hard at getting the processes in place, the staff trained up, the reward system/s in place and a myriad of other things. Your employees by now have seen the benefits and start

joining the initiative. You are on your way down ! Forward and downward towards your goal and to a thriving and exiting business ......

And then you arrive at your goal ! This is where you get on the bicycle and unconsciously start peddling. Without as much as a thought you will be mining for tacit knowledge, capture and share knowledge and then applying those explicit knowledge. Without conceivable effort ! Isn't work great ! It is in this block that you will now live forever and happily ever after.

Are you ready to discuss Knowledge Management and the its implementation ? If your answer is a "Yes !", then we are ready to discuss some issues to ensure your readiness and give you some tools to test that readiness.

Make sure you are, at least, aware of theNew Rules !

12.

AM I READY ?

If you have been wondering if your team or business is ready for this implementation of Knowledge Management, I will say “Yes !’. Just because you are wondering......

If you want to work on factual evidence, I will introduce to you a diagnostic tool that your management group can apply themselves and proceed further down the work levels to determine the readiness level of the employees to indulge in Knowledge Management and grow your business out of its seams.

In this chapter, we

• will get a clear understanding of the Adizes life-cycle model, and where your business is along this curve

• be able to decide whether or not your business is ready for a KM initiative

• be able to decide whether or not to work on the people issues, and what issues to work on, before embarking on this improvement initiative

• will generate an awareness in your employee group and colleagues regarding the organisational gaps that need to be addressed before implementing an successful Knowledge Management initiative.

Let us start with the Adizes model and some notes regarding this model.

• Courtship: The initial stage is synonymous by entrepreneurial excitement. This stage is typically focused on innovation, service improvement and new service development. This stage is often characterised by emergent strategies and not fixed strategies, flexibility and responsiveness instead of rigid processes and stagnation. Passion and believe in the company run on a high at this stage.

• Adolescence: During this stage your business will be expanding services to gain some buy-in from the public. Organisational promises are brandied about to meet public needs and demands. Focus is moving from external to internal projects. The strategic vision now centres on achieving rapid and visible results.

• Prime: At the stage, the business has now developed into an efficient and effective unit of operation. The strategic focus now is based on developing new services and processes. New communication and marketing strategies are also typical responses during this stage.

• Zenith: This is the height of the Adizes curve. The business is established and it enjoys the benefits of a good reputation while still capable of flexibility and responsive to changes in the economic environment. The Strategic focus is now on continuous improvement.

• Aristocracy: During this stage, the company is regarded as a dominant force. The company is now losing its entrepreneurial edge and complacency is setting in. Flexibility and responsiveness is being replaced by “red tape” which is strangling creativity and innovation. The business is now inwardly focused.

• Early bureaucracy: During this stage, the business is unresponsive to the environment and losing sight of both customer and staff needs. Interactions, systems and process is now formalised. The desire to reinvent processes, structures and systems are stifled by senior staff clinging to jobs and reinforcing “their way” of business.

From this model, Adizes clearly recommends that companies must remain in the Prime stage. When a company slips forward, towards the right side of the curve, the time is right for the implementation an initiative like Knowledge Management to assist the business to maintain their position at the Prime stage of this model.

KAP Organisational Readiness Framework

Kukard, April and Pinkham developed the KAP Organisational Framework during 1999 to evaluate people readiness for a Knowledge Management initiative.

To maximize responsiveness, it is often best to conduct the completion of the “questionnaire” in a facilitated workshop. It is critical that the questions and statements put are well understood. The last thing that you want is a confused set of responses that might skew the Readiness Continuum and starts the project off on the wrong foot. Spent some time on getting this part right and you will reap the benefits of your efforts.

To download a copy of the KAP Organizational Readiness Framework, click here.

Finally, after all responses have been collected, add up the respective ratings and your summarised tabled should looks something like the following:

020406080

KAP Totals

KAP Totals

The resultant column chart represents where your company falls on the KM Readiness Continuum.

This example shows a company that are leaning to the right, indicating that some fundamental organisational culture, process and structure changes need to take place before embarking on a Knowledge Management initiative.

If the chart is weighted to the left side, your organisation is well suited to establish a Knowledge Management culture.

REFERENCES

Adizes, I. (1999), Managing Corporate Ligecycles, Paramus:Prentice-Hall

April & Izadi, (2004), Knowledge Management Praxis, Juta

Gorman, C (2002), Ghost Story, KCS Publishing

Davenport, Pruzak (2000), Working Knowledge, Harvard Business School Press

Collison & Parcell (2001), Learning to Fly, Capstone Publishing