A Design Process for Embedding Knowledge Management in ...

A Design Process for Embedding Knowledge Management in Everyday Work Marcel Hoffmann, Kai-Uwe Loser, Thomas Walter, Thomas Herrmann University of Dortmund, Germany. Informatics and Society, FB 4 LS6 {hoffmann, loser, walter, herrmann }@iug.cs.uni-dortmund.de ABSTRACT

Knowledge Management Software must be embedded in processes of knowledge workersÕ everyday practice. In order to attain a seamless design, regarding the special qualities and requirements of knowledge work, detailed studies of the existing work processes and analysis of the used knowledge are necessary. Participation of the knowledge owners and future users is an important factor for success of knowledge management systems. In this paper we describe characteristics of knowledge work motivating the usage of participatory design techniques. We suggest a design process for developing or improving knowledge management, which includes ethnographic surveys, user participation in cyclic improvement, scenario based design, and the use of multiple design artifacts and documents. Finally we explain the benefits of our approach. The paper is based on a case study we carried out to design and introduce a knowledge management system in a training company. Keywords

Knowledge management, knowledge work, organizational learning, organizational memory systems, participatory design, INTRODUCTION

Advanced technology for knowledge management offers prospects for knowledge sharing in communities of practice or interest, in general, and in workgroups in organizations, in particular: You benefit easily from your peer workerÕs experience when his individually learned lessons are delivered to your desk just in time. Do not bother with searching for or filtering relevant information, but leave this work to software agents. Concentrate on your primary work task. The most successful practices will be made available to you quickly. Self-controlled and demand-driven mutual learning increases every workerÕs competence and flexibility. Mutual stimulation causes more creativity and results in a better performance of the whole community or organization. These are common expectations towards knowledge management technology. But the reality is different. In order to bring organizations closer to their expectations and visions, embedding knowledge management in everyday work is most important. In this paper we describe a design process, which leads to the development of a knowledge management system. The suggested methodology includes:

·

Ethnographic surveys on knowledge related work practice and detailed analysis of the existing document management and archives · User participation in continuous improvement · Scenario-based design · Combination and linking of design documents and artifacts, e.g. rich pictures, diagrams of work processes or prototypes. The mere introduction of technology is not sufficient to reach the desired goals. Instead, technology has to adapt to organizational and social requirements. Utility has to be ensured on the organizational level as well as on the individual level where the value offered by a service is always measured against the effort needed for achievement. No matter how much effort we spend on the reduction of extra costs and overhead, organizational learning still depends on voluntary participation in activities of informing others and activities of keeping informed. Against that background, the most promising approach to support participation by means of technology seems to be to embed knowledge management software into the primary work activities where knowledge is created or searched for. We want to establish adapted knowledge management software that takes advantage of existing groupware systems and includes processes, archives/documents, roles, and activities of the existing work systems. [13] refer to this kind of software as taskbased organizational memory. According to [24] the management of organizational knowledge aims at the improvement of four basic knowledge processes: · the development of new knowledge, · the preservation of new and existing knowledge, · the distribution of knowledge, and finally · the recombination of available knowledge. Of course, all of these processes need organizational, social, and technological support. Correspondingly a companyÕs Knowledge Management System (KMS) encompasses organizational, social, and technological subsystems. From our point of view, knowledge management combines continuous organizational design, development of human resources, and innovation of technology. Success can only be ensured by simultaneous development of all parts of the KMS and their mutual adaptation. Knowledge management software is defined as software that support the acquisition, retention, search, distribution, filtering, combination, and comparison of knowledge. Our concept

of knowledge management software relates closely to definitions of organizational memory systems as given by [26] or [2] and especially to the so called communicative view on organizational memory [27]. However, we emphasize the combination of several tools in a knowledge management toolkit, which typically includes advanced groupware technology. To distinguish technology from the complete Knowledge Management System (KMS), we usually speak of Knowledge Management Software (KMSoftware) when referring to technologyÕs part in knowledge management. In the past we applied techniques, like ethnographic surveys, business process visualization, and prototyping, in the context of the introduction of WorkflowManagement-Systems [28]. Recently we transferred our experience to the design of KMS. Our approach to build KMS combines · a design process, which leads to the development of a knowledge management system, · a knowledge management toolkit, which provides advanced software concepts for embedded knowledge management, e.g. collaborative filtering [19] or shared perspectives on information [25], and · a knowledge management seminar, that supports the development of human resources and the improvement of social conditions for learning and knowledge sharing. The design process we describe in this paper is based on participatory design, e.g. [21] and [8]. Furthermore, we refer to related studies on knowledge work ([1], [3], [4], [6], [10], [17]) and research concerning the design and introduction of KM-Software in organizations [2], [11], and [13]. The empirical background of this paper is provided by a case study in a training company. The company offers behavior training in sales and management business and belongs to the leading organizations in this field in Germany. 20 trainers are carrying out more than 3000 training days each year. They are supported by an administration of about 20 employees, including customer service, trainer assistance, seminar conceptionists etc. Together with the office for strategic development and the chief conceptionist we formed the core of the design team. In the course of the project we worked with 10 trainers and most of the administrative functions. In order to draw attention to the special requirements in developing KMS, we start our report with a description of the aims of the project and the characteristics of the knowledge work we experienced in the training business. We present our approach for embedding KM-Software in everyday work and give reasons, why participatory design is the key issue in the course of the introduction of embedded KM-Software. We conclude with lessons learned from the application of participatory design techniques in the context of knowledge management and give an outlook on future activities and resulting research efforts.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN TRAINING BUSINESS Objectives of the knowledge management project

The aim of our joint project with the training company is to develop knowledge management by reengineering organizational processes, educate the trainers in cooperative and communicative knowledge sharing, and to introduce an embedded KM-Software. Currently, the company handles over 50,000 training documents and produces hundreds of new documents each week. Trainers constantly produce new training material and gather valuable experience which does not find its way into the companyÕs archives. Therefore, the training company wants to increase the knowledge exchange to improve the quality and the development of new training services. Documents are retained according to numbering-systems. You can only find a document when you know its number. Accordingly, one of the goals of the project is to establish search functionality that allows trainers to search for training elements for a certain purpose and to find related training elements in the electronic archive. Other goals of the project are the reduction of brain-drain, when trainers leave the company, and the support of new trainers in developing training expertise. Analyzing the work of trainers in our partners' company we found many characteristics of knowledge work which play a crucial role in requirements for the design of KMSoftware. Some of these qualities are described in [1], [3], [4], [6], [10], [17]. Trainers in our partners' company act in various environments and collaborate with many different partners. They are exposed to the changing demands of customers. Even though knowledge exchange with other trainers is considered important and valuable among the trainers, cooperation is low. Trainers constantly feel that they should communicate and cooperate more often. The trainers develop individual working practices and tend to create personal archives or views on common information. Finally, trainers work more self-controlled than knowledge workers in other domains. In the remainder of this section we present results of our case study guided by 5 qualities of the knowledge work we found in the company: · Flexible reaction to changing requirements. · Sparse network of cooperation, dense network of common interests. · Differing work practice. · Individual perspectives on common information. · Self-control and intrinsic motivation. We compare our findings to results of related research and derive requirements on KM-Software design in each section. Most of the qualities of the knowledge work we discovered are somehow related to each other, and complement and reinforce each other.

Flexible reaction to changing requirements

The training company provides public seminars, called Òopen trainingsÓ, and individually customized services to customers, called Òcompany-internal trainingsÓ. The open trainings represent common training knowledge. Every trainer is supposed to carry out open trainings. However, most seminar days, are carried out in company-internal trainings. Responding to individual demands of the customer is considered a very important quality of the service. As a consequence, every company-internal training design deals with specific concepts and problems of the customerÕs domain and organization. The training knowledge is continuously renewed. Therefore, keeping oneself informed on current developments and the ability to get into new subjects are important requirements in the trainerÕs work practice. Awareness of developments in the customerÕs domain, anticipation of the forthcoming demands, and rapid creation of new services are important success factors in many domains. [6] relates the demand for flexibility to the occurrence of ÒwickedÓ problems. In order to ensure a flexible reaction, KM-Software must support the assessment of existing resources, their recombination, adaptation, and completion. Including external resources and information, the services can augment sensitivity to new trends. Sparse network of cooperation, of common interests

dense network

Every time trainers prepare and lead training in cooperation, they learn much from their colleagues. However, in many cases extra communication costs, which rise with varying working practice, and a certain tendency to avoid inference prevent cooperation. These tendencies are reinforced by organizational arrangements, which usually assign the whole responsibility for the success of seminars, all the efforts, and the profit to one trainer. Moreover, most of the time trainers are working at home and at various places where trainings are held. In consequence, they personally meet very seldom and therefore have a lack of personal exchange of information. Chances for discussing experiences in teaching techniques and methods are rare. Little interaction of protagonists, in spite of common interest and perceived potentials of cooperation, is a common problem in many domains. E.g. medicine, where it takes years to spread new methods for diagnosis or therapy, or science, where research is conducted in great secrecy, especially in Europe. In these cases KM-Software has to support the flow of knowledge, and must promote communication and cooperation. Knowledge management supported by KM-Software can help to bridge the gap between the trainers, e.g. by supporting the discovery of potential partners, by supporting the discovery of the peerÕs contributions, or by reducing obstacles in communication. Communication for exchanging knowledge and experience is in the focus of organizational and technical solutions. Differing work practice

Trainers act differently on many tasks. Some trainers reported that they frequently spend one or two days in the

customerÕs organization before they prepare an offer. Others usually prepare seminar offers by recombining existing material. During the preparation of the seminar documents some trainers use computers; others work with photocopies, scissors and glue. Some trainers rarely use the same training element more than two times. Others scarcely create new elements, instead they adapt existing material. Trainers use different information sources and make use of the trainerÕs assistance in varying degrees. Many deviations in work practice we found, correspond to environmental factors, e.g. the customerÕs actual demand, or the availability of existing material. However, individual experience and personal preference play a crucial role in personal work practice, e.g. the acquaintance of a trainer with a customer, or the trainerÕs opinion on the existing material. In tasks which require individual judgement the outcome and the work process often becomes contingent. Increased scope of action is highly connected to diversity of work practice. As [10] already found out, knowledge workers Òsolve problems and generate output largely by resort to structures internal to themselves ...Ó. So our trainers did, but in contrast to KiddÕs findings many trainers depend heavily on filed information. [3] investigate individual and institutional influences on information-seeking behavior in the financial business and compare the outcomes of information seeking efforts. In our domain there is no universally accepted standard of quality. Therefore, the value of differing work practices could not be measured against the outcomes. Since the learning organization calls for responsible and creative knowledge work, it becomes even more important to restrain from imposing one-bestway solutions to given tasks. On the contrary, KMSoftware must support different ways to accomplish one task, not restricting the personal choices. Individual perspectives on common information

Individual preference does not only influence work process but also determines the interpretation of training knowledge. Even though there is a central archive of training documents and a central organizational unit, called the ÒconceptionistÓ, who provides training knowledge, all the trainers maintain a personal archive. These archives represent a compilation of the common documents. Moreover, they include documents that the central archive does not contain. Most important, the personal archives include personal versions of common documents, links between documents and are structured according to individual needs. Trainers have different understandings even of the same training documents. When trainers use common material, they create their personal versions of training elements. For instance, some trainers leave out certain parts of case studies, or they add new rules or additional roles to role-plays. A special training element is the Òmemory nailÓ. Stories, games, or activities which bring the message of a training unit to a point and make the participants remember the message easily. Trainers adapt memory nails to their individual appearance and charisma. One trainer told us that when he once performed a certain memory-nail joke, like his colleague told him, it was a failure. Later he slightly changed the story and earned success.

Knowledge workers tend to create personal views on common information spaces, e.g. by keeping bookmarks or copies of documents. [4] reports how scientist disaggregate articles and make use of components. We observed how individually structured aggregation of contents in groups or modules was used by trainers to reduce complexity. Whereas [17] and [1] focus on reading and annotating existing material in order to create new contents or to enrich existing material, the trainerÕs adaptations we observed in our case study always result in contributions to the knowledge base. These contributions can either be considered as modifications of an original, but from another point of view they can replace the original, too. This is different with annotations. Accordingly, the trainerÕs personalization of existing material can lead to deeper individualization of information. From the experience we gathered in our study, we expect that personalization of shared information is most important for successful behavior. Withdrawing personal archives will not result in better information sharing, but in declined performance. Instead, we need concepts to reconcile personal utility and sharing of information. Self-control and intrinsic motivation

In our partnerÕs company, twenty trainers are employed as sort of freelancers. They decide how many seminar days they carry out, what services and training contents they offer, and which customers and partners they cooperate with. Moreover, the trainerÕs expertise is considered the most important capital. Trainers have much influence on the companyÕs strategic decisions. In our partnerÕs company there is no chance to introduce new rules, processes or technology against the trainersÕ will. Especially, trainers cannot be forced to make use of any information system. Therefore, the KM-Software must provide a value to create motivation for use. Even though this degree of autonomy and influence of knowledge workers may be an outstanding example, the trends towards profit centers, networked organizations, flexibility of work relations, and the emphasis on selfcontrol in leading organizational theories (e.g. [20],[22]) altogether point at the growing importance of requirements of knowledge workers. As a consequence, the application of participatory design techniques becomes a crucial factor for success in the development of KM-Software. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT OF K M S Continuous Improvement as a foundation for a Knowledge Management Design Process

The success of the design and introduction of a KMS is based essentially on a well-structured methodology for reengineering the organizational and technical constitution of the business concern. Although business processes play a minor role in the field of knowledge management, we can profit from the field of Business Process Reengineering (BPR) in designing an organizational procedure for the introduction of KMS in companies. Especially our approach of integrating KMS in everyday work requires adequate methods for reengineering.

We believe that for application in knowledge management, the conventional approach to BPR [9] has to be augmented by some bottom-up methods, e.g. [22] or [20]. This approach led us to a framework which presents a set of phases in a cyclic order [28] (see figure 1) following the methodology known from the field of SoftwareEngineering [8] and Information-Management [15]. This process of cyclic improvement builds the methodological basis to conduct a design process for embedding knowledge management in everyday work. We have already gathered much experience with the process of cyclic improvement in industrial projects for the introduction of Workflow-Management-Technology and the design of groupware-systems in companies. There is a strong relation between the participation of potential users of a KM-Software and its success in practice. Therefore, the participation during the process of cyclic improvement should be conducted by adequate techniques known from the field of Participatory Design (PD) [e.g. 21]. In the next section we describe the resulting methodological framework for embedding KM in everyday work. Methodological framework

Figure 1 gives an overview of the methodological framework we used to introduce knowledge management in the business context of the training company. We started the project establishment by discussing the objectives of the participants in the project. These goals were noted as indicators (benchmarks) to allow the measuring of success of our project. In the next step we tried to find out the relevant kinds of knowledge for the tasks of the employees. As a starting point we had to limit the area of knowledge. The first area of knowledge was set to special elements of trainings called "memory-nails", which the trainers use in seminars to underline the meaning and teach the consequences of certain forms of behavior. After selecting this limited area of knowledge we stepped in a process of cyclic development. This process starts with the gathering of data and the development of models. In the first sequence of the cycle the kind of knowledge contained in the use of "memory-nails" should be figured out (see figure 1; "cyclic development"). To reach this, six interviews and three workshops with trainers were conducted. During the first workshops, we used visualizations of our understanding of knowledge and of information trainers need to create seminars to support the discussions with the employees. This visualization was based on ER-diagrams and rich-pictures [16]. Subsequently we designed an integrated KMS to support the focused knowledge area. This included the organizational structure as well as the technical support. For the description of this design we used models generated with the modeling method SeeMe (see also section: "The use of SeeMe"). The design was followed by the construction of a prototype which supported retention, adaptation, search, and awareness of memory-nails. We demonstrated this

prototype in several workshops to get feedbacks about the applicability of our ideas. The discussion about the prototype set the base to enlarge our focus on any kind of training element which is used in seminars. We learnt that one of the crucial factors for success and acceptance could be summarized in the question: "How can a KMS support the original tasks of the trainers?" Consequently we had to involve a perspective on the everyday work of the trainers in the next sequence of the cycle. As a result of this second sequence we constructed a system that supports all tasks of the trainer to create their seminars. Especially the cooperation between the trainers and conceptionist of the training company was considered in the design of the system. In this design, trainers explicate their knowledge concerning training-elements while cooperating with the conceptionist and designing a new seminar with the help of a technical system. By using the system, trainers share their knowledge and get access to an area of knowledge that every trainer may profit from. The second sequence of the cycle is followed by an implementation of the system. Currently we started the implementation with the support of a software company. The introduction and use of the system leads to a continuous process of improvement. It contains mechanisms of feedback and evaluation which initiates new sequences of the cycle.

software system. The design of technical structures cannot be separated form the design of the organizational environment. Therefore, we integrated the design of functionality of the technical system with the construction of usage scenarios. With our methodology we refer to the idea of scenario-based design and used the description of user-interaction scenarios as a particularly important medium for representing, analyzing, and planing as to how a computer system may have an impact on its users' activities and experiences [7]. The scenarios describe the use of the KM-Software from the perspective of every participating role. Especially the development of a seminar design and the enlargement of our focus (see figure 1) was driven by participatory constructed usage scenarios and the related functionality of the KM-Software. This combination allowed us to get a detailed overview of the expectation levels. Moreover, we clarified the existence of different interests of the employees that are related to the KMS. The awareness to different interests in a very early stage of the project helped to avoid serious conflicts. Another outcome of this methodology is an early commitment of the participants to reengineer the organizational structures. The acceptance of the necessary changes was augmented by the possibility of codetermination of every role in the definition of usage scenarios and the related functionality of a technical system. One basic aspect for the success of the participatory design of the KMS is a comprehensible representation of the

Simultaneous Design of Usage Scenarios a n d Functionality

Our understanding of a KMS contains a strong relation between organizational structures and their support by a

SteeringCommittee

Methodological framework for the introduction of a KMS

Consultant / Experts

Trainer

Project- Establishment Analysis of the objectives of Knowledge-Management

Selection of a first knowledge area

Cyclic Development

Gathering of data / construction of models

concept development

Implementation

demonstration / enlarging the supported area

Evaluation

Design Artifacts benchmarks

ER-diagrams

rich pictures

SeeMediagrams

prototypes

Figure 1: Methodological framework

screen shots

organizational and technical environment. We used several representation techniques, which are described in the following sections. The resulting method is a combination of the socio-oriented modeling method SeeMe and additional adequate representation techniques. In the next section we describe the methods and techniques we used for the methodological framework in greater detail. HOW TO BRING THE METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK INTO REALIT Y Ethnographic surveys

Techniques of ethnographic studies [5] played a central role in the gathering of data and the construction of models. Besides interviews and workshops we observed five trainers during their everyday work and tried to understand how they design new seminars. During our observations we asked them to describe the sub-task that they have to carry out and to delegate sub-tasks to us. We found a large variety of methods how trainers design seminars that have never been mentioned during the interviews or workshops. We depicted our understanding of how trainers work under real circumstances in diagrams of the work-processes, which built the basis for discussion and for the analysis to construct a design for a KMS. The experience with the methods made clear that the direct interaction is time consuming but more than helpful to get first hand information. This is indispensable for the creation of a system that is embedded into everyday work. The use of ER-Diagrams

For the representation and structuring of information and data that the trainers use and produce while designing seminars we used ER-diagrams. These diagrams were

useful for the construction of the database system and the internal communication of the design team. But they played a minor role in the communication-process between the employees and the design team. We developed ER diagrams to get an overview on the knowledge which is relevant for the design of a seminar. Only little feedback from the participants was provoked while presenting these diagrams. In contrast to this experience, the participants commented strongly on the relevant knowledge when we showed first prototypes in combination with SeeMediagrams afterwards. Based on this experience, we share the opinion of [16] that the comprehensibility of ER-diagrams is a problem especially in business contexts, because of their look and feel and their failure to visualize complex structures in a comprehensive way. As in many projects for the introduction of technical systems in business contexts, a major barrier for the acceptance of KM-Software is the comprehensibility of Corporate Data Models [23]. To overcome this barrier we used an additional modeling method called SeeMe to describe complex corporate structures. ER methods may be helpful in other domains, the experiences in this project were mostly negative as the comprehensibility for the trainers was limited. The use of S e e M e

The representations of organizational and technical structures were based on the modeling method SeeMe, which allows us to represent semi-structured processes and social aspects of cooperation and communication. With SeeMe we can develop diagrams presenting socio-technical systems and processes. This is especially useful if the integration of technical and organizational aspects has to be

Trainer

Construction of new seminar-briefcases or training-elements Design of new training-elements change view to TE

register meta data

generate new file with external editor

Compilation of new seminar-briefcases change view to SB

register meta data

generate order for documents

generate new table of content

add elements

KM-Software perspectives

seminar offers (SO)

seminar training briefcase (SB) elements (TE)

Figure 2: Example of a usage scenario

links

emphasized as it is the case with knowledge management. The concepts of SeeMe can be used to extend existing modeling methods (e.g. UML) or be combined to an independent method. SeeMe combines characteristics of well known methods and the essential aspects of sociooriented theories such as activity theory [12], coordination theory [14] etc. Fig. 4 shows the basic elements: roles (ellipses), activities (rounded rectangles) and entities (normal rectangles). Roles always present living units which are socially dependent on each other. Examples are organizational units, persons or functional aspects of persons (e.g. being a teacher). Documents, tools, containers, computers and software agents are presented as entities. Roles and Entities are connected by activities: Roles can initiate or carry out activities while entities support them or even automatically control them. Furthermore, entities can be manipulated by activities. As it becomes obvious in fig. 2, the elements of SeeMe can be nested. An element can be specified in detail by embedded sub-elements of the same or another type. Nesting is a well known concept to provide detailed descriptions of selected aspects. However, in the case of social systems, it is not sensible or even not possible to specify every detail. Therefore, SeeMe offers a set of indicators to deal with incompleteness. The diagrams of SeeMe are interactive. It is possible to hide selected sub-elements. By a black semi-circle we indicate that something is hidden. This semi-circle can be used as a clickable field which can be activated to reveal the details. With this mechanism the number of elements of a diagram can be reduced to increase comprehensibility. Sometimes the modeler do not want to specify more details no matter whether they are known or not. This is indicated by an empty semi-circle. If something is not known, we use three dots to ... signal incompleteness. A question mark tells the ? recipient that the specificationÕs correctness can be doubted. Three Ò???Ó indicate that it is not sure ??? whether the specification is complete or not. We have used the symbols of the latter type of incompleteness in several case studies to support the participative design of socio-technical systems. By this method, we have highlighted those aspects of the systems which needed further clarification. SeeMe serves two purposes. It is possible to formally specify a technical and organizational solution as far as it is necessary and it allows freedom of decision for its subsequent use as far as it is sensible for the participants. During this project, SeeMe was especially helpful for organizing and guiding presentations and discussions. Integration SeeMe

of

additional

representation

in

We used SeeMe to design and demonstrate the corporate structures and the organizational concept. The idea is to use the modeling method SeeMe as the core for descriptions to offer links from several elements of the

diagram to additional representations. These representations are strongly related to the objectives of the models. Generally, diagrams as part of complex models are not sufficient for a comprehensible representation of the whole context and all aspects of a KMS. Basically we share the opinion of [18], who describes two main reasons for the comprehensibility of a graphical representation: 1. the importance of experience and training in the use of graphical notations 2. the importance of additions to the original graphic representation (the secondary notation) As a result of our research we underline the importance of various additional techniques for representation, to detail the elements of a diagram. A diagram then can be used as a core for navigation to a wide variety of other descriptions. This understanding led us to a conceptual framework, which is named "Integration of showcases in models" [28]. We use the term "showcase" to summarize all additions to a graphical model, which explains the elements of the model in greater detail. In this project, we simultaneously designed usage scenarios and functionality. Therefore, a combination of SeeMe-diagrams and prototypes (screenshots) was sensible. As mentioned above, we have gathered experience with this kind of combination in projects for the introduction of groupware and Workflow-Management-Technology in other business contexts which underlines its usefulness and value. In the next section we give an example of a usage scenario which demonstrates the combination of SeeMe-diagrams and the prototypes (screenshots) (e.g. figure 3). Usage Scenarios

The diagram in fig.2 shows the handling of seminarbriefcases and training elements. The role Trainer is performing the tasks Design of new training element and Compilation of new training briefcases . Both activities are supported with the KM-Software that consists of support functionality for perspectives, seminar offers, seminar-briefcase, training elements and links. The Design of new training elements requires that the view is switched to training-elements. Then meta-data will be registered in the system and a new file gets generated and can be edited with an external editor. For the Compilation of new seminar-briefcases, also the view has to be changed to seminar briefcases. Similar to the element, meta-data will be entered for the briefcase. A table of contents with training elements can be edited and elements can be added to the seminar. For further work an order gets generated. This order is needed to prepare the documents for participants and the trainer, which will be used during the seminar. This model is a part of the description of a concept for the construction of new seminars. It combines the organizational perspective with the demonstration of the support by a technical system. The demonstrated aspects can be summarized in the questions:

Figure 3: Example of a screenshot 1.

Which tasks have to be fulfilled to create new seminars? 2. How are these tasks supported by the KMS? We presented this model in workshops during the phase of "concept development" (s fig. 1). To augment the comprehensibility of this model, we demonstrated the drawing of each element of the diagram step-by-step. Most elements contain hyperlinks (semi-circles in black) linking to a representation that shows the realization of the specific element by a technical system. Figure 3 gives an example of a screenshot which demonstrates a possible support of the activity "register meta-data". On the left side the three main work objects of the trainers are represented. The trainers may choose whether they want to: 1. Search or design seminar-briefcases (SB, here represented with German abbreviation "TM") 2. Search or design training elements (TE) 3. Search or design seminar-offers (SO, here represented with German abbreviation "TK") On the right side, the trainers may see the information that is related to the selected seminar-briefcase, training-element or seminar offer. Figure 3 shows the meta-information that is related to a chosen training-element. With our methodology we were able to gather qualified feedback from the participants concerning the organizational structure and the technical support. By showing the diagram in combination with the screenshots we found out that the access to meta information has to be

regulated in a special way that involves the conceptionists as a quality-manager. The demonstration of the prototype in this case helped the participants to understand that everyone could easily change the original metainformation, which is not secured by the conceptionist, who has a certain quality standard concerning metainformation. The experience with scenarios in combination with various description methods was very positive, especially for the communication between domain and system experts. Many helpful comments and requirements were discovered while presenting the scenarios. RATIONALE FOR THE METHODOLOGY

We presented a set of methods embedded in a methodological framework. We also described how each element of the methodology contributed to solve the specific problems in the training companyÕs case. These methods and procedures can be applied to other projects to address certain problems that are very common in the field of Knowledge Management. This section presents these common problems in KM and transfers the experiences in solving these problems using the methodology. Common challenges in Knowledge Management

Again, the capital of the training company is the experience and knowledge of the trainers. They are responsible for the acquisition of customers and carry out of the trainings. All other tasks in the company support these tasks of the trainers. There are two main challenges in this project which are typical problems in knowledge management projects:

·

the type of knowledge of the trainers can be characterized as mostly tacit, very personal and contextualized. · the trainersÕ motivation for using computing systems is varying in a wide range. Both challenges result from the already introduced special qualities of the trainerÕs work. As a focus for KM externalizable knowledge is only one, the ÒeasyÓ aspect, as externalizations can be stored in some kind of database. Often domain-knowledge of some sort of experts is tacit and situated and in consequence even harder to deal with. It is essential for the success of knowledge management that participating people are motivated to share their knowledge and learn from others using the available media. People need to be willing to spend the extra effort that is needed for these tasks. Several ways are possible to create the necessary motivation. Handling domain knowledge The necessity of domain understanding

Building a system that supports the requirements of an organization as good as possible, it is indispensable to get a deep understanding of the domain. The gap between domain experts and system experts, known as Òsymmetry of ignoranceÓ, needs to be bridged using methods for communication between the experts. Domain experts do not have the knowledge to design systems on their own and system experts do not have the knowledge about what needs to be supported by the system. The learning processes on both sides need to be focused on present and future domain knowledge, the knowing persons and knowledge processes. Learning about the domain should be done in a very direct way. The proposed methods, including interviews and ethnographic studies are possibilities to acquire this knowledge about the domain. Learning about the developed systems can be supported by various methods to present and discuss results of the design process as they are mentioned above. Various examples were visible in the case study: The work practice of modifying existing training elements to create adapted elements for a specific customer and training is a simple case. Multiple interviews are necessary to find all approaches that workers use to reach their goals. The designed system has to support all approaches to avoid decreasing the motivation to use the system. Another topic that was discovered was the personal and organizational interdependencies that exist between roles like the conceptionists and trainers. The collaboration varies in a wide range: qualitatively and quantitatively. As one goal was to release the conceptionist from the burden of answering simple frequently asked questions, similar scenarios in the use of the system were developed to build support activities analogous to a conceptionist-trainer interaction. For KM artifacts Ð external representations of knowledge Ð have to be looked at in greater detail. Whereas simple descriptions are enough for the description of simple entities, like forms, richer media is needed for both

communication using artifacts and communication about artifacts. In the training companyÕs case the design process for seminars is performed using various artifacts that can be used freely for varying purposes: the already mentioned training elements, seminar concepts and seminar briefcases. Additionally it must be stated that learning about the present state of an organization is only the start for building a successful KMS. The design of a sociotechnical system, including the organizational and technical solutions, needs the participation of experienced employees. Approaches to overcome organizational hindrances motivation Benefits from participatory methods

social and and create

The characterization of KMS as socio-technical leads to the goal of designing and implementing both at the same time: a social and a technical system. The mutual dependencies lead to actions to correct problems in strategy and implementation of the KM-Software. To design sociotechnical systems, people need to get involved in the design process. Their experience from practice is a more than helpful source of knowledge to evaluate and improve the usability of a proposed system. Usability and the creation of a value that users need are the crucial design issues of systems. Applying participatory methods helps to reach this goal. What users think is of value as well as what users think is practicable can influence the design directly. By participatory methods necessary corrective actions can be considered to create a successful system. Possible corrective actions in the systemÕs design are: · rethinking the selection of supported tasks · rethinking the types of information in the system · including special techniques to support awareness and transparency mechanisms Possible corrective actions in the organizationÕs design include: · management actions for building an atmosphere of giving and receiving of knowledge or other corrective actions to motivate people like rewarding systems · creating space for necessary additional knowledge relevant tasks · creating awareness about values and goals of all participants Participation in itself creates motivation as people get the chance to influence the design of the system. The result that ideas and suggestions are visible in the systems (and in the descriptions used to implement the systems) is creating more motivation to try to influence the design to get the best system in accordance with personal interests. Embedding KM in everyday work

Assuming that people are motivated to get their work done, another important strategy is to bring the everyday tasks and tasks that deal with knowledge together as close as possible. Learning is done most effectively if it gets

applied instantly. Knowledge should be applied in everyday acivities. The most valuable knowledge is the knowledge that helps in fulfilling the everyday tasks, and it is usually produced in the performance of the same: working with artifacts leads to modifications of them and, hopefully, to improvements. These improvements represent new knowledge which, again, can be learned and applied by others. Bringing everyday tasks and knowledgerelevant tasks together, helps to reduce necessary extraeffort and creates a high visibility of the KMS. The motivation to fulfill the duties gets transferred to the use of the KMS. To build a system which is specific to the company, we proposed a system using a hyper-structure to create a web of interrelationships based on context and content. The main objects handled in the system are training-elements (TE), seminar-briefcase (SB) and seminar-offer (SO). These are objects already used in the current work. In addition to the hyper-structure built between the objects, additional information is stored that represents further information about context and experiences made. E.g. an element for training some behavior is stored with the information where and when it was used, who used it, personal annotations, characterizations of groups where it was (not) successful and so forth. The basic visual design is shown in fig.3.

for his support in creating prototypes and technical solutions.

CONCLUSIONS

6.

The presented and applied methodology has the following benefits which were recognized until the current state of the project: · Using participatory methods and gathering first hand information open invaluable domain knowledge that is indispensable for the design of a KMS. · Using various types of descriptions in search of the medium which is most appropriate to both Ð the types of knowledge and the addressees Ð is a good foundation for participation. · Workers were participating in a very engaged manner as they recognized that their proposals become part of the system. This also shows that there is enough motivation to share experiences with the entire company. · The numerous requirements collected will be a source for future improvements of the first version of the system to be developed. · The design of the system is oriented to the specifics company requirements. The elements used in the described methodology are selected from the experience made during BPR and other software introduction projects. Combined with techniques known from the field of PD our approach can be extended to a general procedure for the customization of the methodology in knowledge management projects. Further work can be done to support the customization. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the ÒVA Ñ Akademie fŸr FŸhren und VerkaufenÓ, especially Frank Vogt for giving us the chance to apply our methodology. We also thank Stefan Wacker

REFERENCES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

7. 8.

9. 10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

Adler, A.; Gujar, A.; Harrison, B.L.; OÕHara, K.; Sellen, A. A Diary Study of Work-Related Reading: Design Implications for Digital Reading Devices. Proceedings of CHIÕ98 (Los Angeles, CA, April 1998), ACM-Press, 241-248. Ackerman, M.S.; Halverson, Ch. Considering an Organization`s Memory. Proceedings of CSCWÕ98 (Seattle, WA, Nov. 1998), ACM-Press, 39-48. Baldwin, N.S.; Rice, R.E. Information-Seeking Behaviour of Securites Analysts: Individual and Institutional Influences, Information Sources and Channels, and Outcomes. JASIS 48(8), 1997, 674693. Bishop, A.P.: Digital Libraries and Knowledge Diaggregation: The Use of Journal Article Components. Proceedings of DLÕ98 (Pittsburg, PA, June 1998), ACM-Press, 29-39. Blomberg, J.; Giacomi, J.; Mosher, A.; SwentonWall, P. Ethnographic Field Methods and Their Relation to Design. Participatory Design. Principles and Practices. Schuler, D.; Namioka, A. (eds.), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993, 123-157. Buckingham-Shum, S. Negotiating the Construction of Organizational Memories. Information Technology for Knowledge Management. Borghoff, U.; Pareschi, R. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 1998, 55-78. Carroll, J.M. Scenario Based Design. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1995. Floyd, Ch.; ZŸllinghoven, H.; Budde, R.; KeilSlawik, R. Software Development and Reality Construction. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer, 1992. Hammer, M.; Champy, J. Reengineering the Cooperation. New York, Harper Business, 1994. Kidd, A. The Marks are on the Knowledge Worker. Proceedings of CHI«94 (Boston, Mass, April 1998), ACM Press, 186-191. KŸhn, O.; Abecker, A. Corporate Memories for Knowledge Management in Industrial Practice: Prospects and Challenges. Information Technology for Knowledge Management. Borghoff, U.; Pareschi, R. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 1998, 183-206. Kuuti, K. Identifying Potential CSCW Applications by Means of Activity Theory Concepts: A Case Example. Proceedings of CSCWÕ92 (Toronto, Canada, Oct.-Nov. 1992), ACM-Press, 233-240. Linger, H; Burstein, F. Learning in Organizational Memory Systems: An Intelligent Decision Support Perspective. Proceedings of HICSS31 (Hawaii, January 1998), IEEE-Press, 200-208. Malone, T.W. What is Coordination Theory and How Can it Help Design Cooperative Work Systems?

15. 16.

17.

18.

Proceedings of CSCWÕ90 (Los Angeles, CA, October 1990), ACM-Press, 357-370. Martin, J. Information Engineering, Book I, Introduction. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1989. Moody, D. Graphical Entity Relationship Models: Towards a More User Understandable Representation of Data. Proceedings of the ERÕ96 (Cottbus, Germany, October 1996), Berlin: Springer, 227-244. OÕHara, K.; Smith, F.; Newman, W.; Sellen, A.: Student ReadersÕ Use of Library Documents_ Implications for Library Technologies. In: Proceedings of the CHIÕ98 (Los Angeles, CA, April 1998), ACM-Press, 233-240 Petre, M.; Green, T.R.G. Learning to read Graphics: Some Evidence that ÓSeeingÓ an Information Display is an Acquired Skill. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing (1993), 4. Academic Press Limited, 55-70.

19. Resnick, P.; Varian, H.R. (eds) CACM Special Issue on Recommender Systems. Communications of the ACM 40(3) (1997), 56-89. 20. Savage, Ch. M. Fifth Generation Management : CoCreating Through Virtual Enterprising, Dynamic Teaming, and Knowledge Networking, Butterworth Heinemann, 1996. 21. Schuler, D.; Namioka, A. (eds.) Participatory Design. Principles and Practices, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993.

22. Senge, P.M. The Fifth Discipline : The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday, 1994. 23. Shanks, G.G Enterprise Data Architecture: An Empirical Study. Monash University Working Paper, Melbourne: Monash University, 1996. 24. Spek, R. van der; Spijkervet, A. Knowledge Management. Dealing Intelligently with Knowledge. The Hague: Gegevens Koninklijke Bibliotheek, 1989. 25. Stahl, G.; the WebGuide Seminar. Webguide: Guiding Collaborative Learning on the Web with Perspectives. Accepted at AERAÕ99. 26. Stein, E.W; Zwass, V. Actualizing Organizational Memory with Information Systems. Information Systems Research 6(2), 1995, 85-117. 27. Tuomi, I. The Communicative View on Organizational Memory: Power and Ambiguity in Knowledge Creation Systems. Proceedings of HICSS29 (Hawaii, January 1996), IEEE-Press, 147155. 28. Walter, Th.; Herrmann, Th. The Relevance of showcases for the Participative Improvement of Business Processes and Workflow-Management. Proceedings of the PDCÕ98. (Seattle, WA, November 1998), Palo Alto: CPSR, 117-127.