knowledge management for improved performance in

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE IN FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Olomolaiye A1, Liyanage C L2, Egbu C O 3 and Kashiwagi D4 1, 2, 3 4

School of the Built and Natural Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, G4 OBA, UK Associate Professor, Performance Based Studies Research Group (PBSRG), Arizona State University, PO Box 870204, Tempe, AZ 85287-0204, USA

ABSTRACT The evolution of knowledge management (KM) in the 21 st century is gradually gaining significance in delivering sustained achievements to organisations by improving the performance of the people who work for them. This is a core tenet of performance management (PM). KM can also be employed to achieve a more strategic and integrated approach in improving the overall performance of facilities management (FM). Conventionally, FM was considered as a mere support service. It was estranged from the core services of a business. FM is now gaining greater recognition and acceptance as a significant influence upon organisational success and goal achievement which can enhance business performance. Efficiency, quality and the ability to reach set targets are becoming more familiar elements in the FM landscape. An understanding of the contributions of KM in improving performance targets of FM will be explored in this paper. Furthermore a framework that attempts to integrate the important concepts of KM, FM and PM would be presented and discussed. Other issues such as the creation of an „appropriate‟ culture, in-house training, empowerment and 360-degree feedback are also considered. It is believed that the creation of feedback loops that enable the experiences and knowledge gained on the job by individuals to modify corporate objectives can be very useful in sustaining competitive advantage for the benefit of organizations involved in facilities management. This might require cultural changes which encourage knowledge sharing. The paper concludes with the challenges and opportunities, for academia and for practice, in operationalising a framework which draws the interconnectedness between FM, PM and KM. Recommendations are also offered on how the interconnectedness of these important areas can be exploited. This will help focus research in this important area. Keywords: Facilities Management, Human Resource Management, Knowledge Management, Performance Management

INTRODUCTION The 21st century has become known as an age of rapid change in the business world – mergers, re-engineering, and downsizing. These changes are having an impact on the future of various organisations leading to the quest for organisations to begin to balance the short-term fixes of re-structuring with long-term opportunities of managing knowledge. The basis of growth of modern society, therefore, seems to have shifted from natural resources and physical assets to knowledge (Arora, 2002). Knowledge has become the source of innovation, growth and performance improvement. Hence, in today‟s world, it is absolutely critical to build, preserve and leverage organisational knowledge for learning and making organisational performance improvements (Allee, 1997; Lank, 1997). Effective knowledge management (KM) ensures people with needs can find people who can meet those needs within the organisation (Gourlay, 2001). It also ensures that the knowledge held by employees is amplified and internalised as part of an organisation‟s knowledge base. Essentially, knowledge management (KM) is about making the combined knowledge and experience of an organisation accessible to employees, who are responsible for using it prudently and for replenishing the stock (Army Knowledge Online, 1999). This cyclic process stimulates collaboration and empowers employees to continually enhance the way work is performed. It has been observed that employees perform very well when their work environment provides the necessary support and avenues for expression as entrenched in KM objectives. The key objectives of organisations undertaking a KM activities programme can be summarised as the improvement of the performance of individuals, teams and organisations in order to innovate (TFPL, 1999). KM can also be employed to achieve a more strategic and integrated approach in improving the overall performance of facilities management (FM). Conventionally, FM was considered as a mere support service. It was estranged from the core services of a business. FM is now gaining greater recognition and acceptance as a significant influence upon organisational success and goal achievement which can enhance business performance. Efficiency, quality and the ability to reach set targets are becoming more familiar elements in the FM landscape. An understanding of the contributions of KM in improving performance targets of FM will be explored in this paper. Furthermore a framework that attempts to integrate the important concepts of KM, FM and PM would be presented and discussed. Other issues such as the creation of an „appropriate‟ culture, in-house training, empowerment and 360-degree feedback are also very important to the field of FM. It is believed that the creation of feedback loops that enable the experiences and knowledge gained on the job by individuals to modify corporate objectives can be very useful in sustaining competitive advantage for the benefit of organizations involved in facilities management (FM).

KM AND FM RESEARCH PROJECTS This paper is drawn from the literature reviews of “works-in-progress” of two PhD research projects. One looks at capitalising on the human resource aspects of knowledge management for performance improvements in construction organisations. The other

looks at controlling healthcare acquired infections (HAI) by developing a performance management framework for achieving quality in healthcare. They both began in February/March 2003 and are due to be completed on or before January/February 2006. A robust methodology has been adopted for both research projects. It consists of a literature study, a pilot study which combines semi-structure interviews and case study research. The two research projects‟ main studies intend to implement Dr George Kelly‟s repertory Grid Technique. The Repertory Grid Technique arose naturally out of Kelly‟s personal construct theory (PCT) as a method whereby we may “look beyond words”. The model underlying Construct Psychology is explicitly the idea of “every man is his own scientist”. Kelly (1955) believed that we strive to make sense out of our universe, out of ourselves, out of the particular situations we encounter. To this end each of us invents and re-invents an implicit theoretical framework which, be it well or badly designed, is our personal construct system. Kelly (1955) devised Grid Technique as a method for exploring personal construct systems. It is an attempt to stand in others‟ shoes, to see their world as they see it, to understand their situation, their concerns. In developing the Repertory Grid Technique, Kelly (1955) was interested in developing instruments in which the researcher‟s frame of reference and worldview would not be imposed on the respondent. At the same time, he needed a method that would reliably elicit the respondent‟s cognitive structure. Research Project 1 The first research project is looking into how to capitalise on human resource (HR) aspects of knowledge management for performance improvements in construction organisations. It is believed that as the shift towards a knowledge-based economy continues, a real meaning is beginning to be levelled at the phrase “people are our greatest asset” (Golzen, 1998). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) assert that an organisation cannot create knowledge by itself; it is the individual in the organisation that create knowledge. Little is known about the favourable circumstances that stimulate people in organisations to create, share or apply knowledge (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). The concepts and frameworks of HRM can be utilized to improve our understanding of what shapes the willingness (or reluctance) of workers to share their knowledge (Hislop, 2002). This is the premise of this research. Knowledge management practices need to focus on the people while regarding technology as an enabling factor. It is important to improve awareness of the significance and challenges of HR issues on KM in construction organisations. In addition, the development of an appropriate framework that can provide support with assessing and/or measuring the impact of people issues on KM and on organisational performance should be of use to the construction industry. Research Project 2 The second research project aims to develop a conceptual framework for managing the performance of Facilities Management (FM) services in the control of Healthcare Associated Infections (HAI). HAI by definition means „infection which was neither

present nor incubating at the time of admission but has developed during the course of a stay in hospital or other facility‟ (Scottish Executives Action Plan, 2002). HAI could occur in any healthcare setting such as general practice, day surgery centres, residential aged care, long-term care facilities, child care centres, nursing homes, and community services other than hospitals. Besides, infections can manifest themselves during the stay in hospital or in the period following the hospital stay (Haley, 1986 as cited in Horton and Parker 2002). The research study focuses only on analysing the existing system of infection control in National Health Service in Scotland (NHSS). This study will explore and document the opportunities and challenges associated with sharing of knowledge between core and non-core service professionals. In addition, it will elicit elements and constructs on FM staff‟s perception on „integration‟ which can enhance performance and sharing of knowledge in infection control.

GENERIC VIEW OF FM As Barrett (1995) indicated, it is commonly accepted that FM has a strong tendency to be technically oriented and reactive. This is in stark contrast with the proactive service orientation called for by the very notion of facilities management, as a service that creates conducive environment for the achievement of core business objectives. Payne (2002) indicates the traditional view of FM as a non-core or pure support function which is often seen to be at an arm‟s length to the organization. Now, in best operation mode, facilities function could be described as the „glue‟ that holds the organization together and enables it to provide its output in a seamless manner (Payne, 2002). Though Payne has not shown the way FM holds the organisation as a „glue‟ it should be worthwhile considering FM‟s importance to organisation because FM appears to be gaining greater recognition and acceptance as a significant influence upon organizational success and goal achievement. With reference to The Centre for Facilities Management (Alexander, 1994), FM is the process by which an organization delivers and sustains a quality working environment and delivers quality support services to meet the organizational objectives at best cost. Similarly, Barrett and Baldry (2003) describe FM as „an integrated approach to maintaining, improving and adapting the building of an organization in order to create an environment that strongly supports the primary objectives of that organization‟. Therefore, the discipline of Facilities Management (FM) can greatly influence the physical environment in ways which can satisfy the organizational core objectives. However, the role of FM is broader than the design of the product and production of the physical workplace. It entails the integration of people, technology and support services to achieve the organisation‟s mission (Alexander, 1996). Therefore, Alexander defines FM as the process by which an organisation ensures that its building, systems and services support core operations and processes as well as contribute to achieving its strategic objectives in changing conditions. Here the context of change is described as creating „new organisations‟ or improving business processes. Fielder (Chairman of British Institute of Facilities Management - BIFM) proclaim that facilities managers have extensive responsibilities, for providing, maintaining and developing a number of services which range from property strategy, space management and communications infrastructure to building maintenance, administration and contract management, including catering, cleaning and security. According to him FM at a

corporate level, contributes to the delivery of strategic and operational objectives, while providing a safe and efficient working environment which is essential to the performance of the concerned business, on a day to day level. Robathan (1996) presents FM services in an organisation in three levels. First at the „lowest‟ level – the day to day support of operations such as maintenance, security, photocopying services, telephone services, etc. Next it is the planning function. It includes space planning, building projects, building management systems, resource management, health and safety and continuity planning. At this level the facilities manager acts on strategic demands, and develops tactical plans in line with the strategy. The final level is at board level – the director of facilities – that the buildings, plant and services of a business need to be managed as assets that generate return on investment. In contrast, Williams (1994 and 2001) explains a different approach to describe FM services which involve three facets; sponsorship, intelligence and service management. Facilities Sponsorship in this respect implies the ownership of responsibility for the facilities provision, the stewardship of the organisation‟s policy for the provision, maintenance and allocation of resources for the accommodation and services required to facilitate corporate objectives. The „intelligence‟ facet denotes understanding and monitoring facilities management function with regard to core business requirements. Facilities service management is the overall direction and coordination of all the services such as cleaning, distribution, etc (Williams, 1994). Basically, the FM levels mentioned above can be identified as two types. One is, as Robathan (1996) states, at the „lowest‟ level, i.e. day to day operational level where facilities staff will perform. The other will be the „planning and management‟ level with the involvement of facilities manager. Soft FM and Hard FM classifications Hinks (2003) has divided the explicit forms of FM services mainly into two categories; hard FM and soft FM. Here, hard FM relates to management and maintenance of property while soft FM includes management of support services. Describing further, the built environment including infrastructure facilities such as estate and property, indoor air, structure and fabric, water supply, electricity and telecommunication systems come under the first and catering, cleaning, waste management, security and laundry describes the latter. But these are not strict definitions and there are some FM services that might be classified either way such as cleaning (NHS, 2003). For the purpose of this paper, the authors attempt to divide FM considering the people and technological issues. Herein, people issues are placed under „soft FM category‟ and technological issues under the „hard FM category‟. There is a general consensus that, in any people-oriented business, soft issues are crucial in improving the quality of an organisation. This basically includes managing people‟s performance and enhancing their skills and competencies to reach started targets. From an FM point of view, it should also include better integration with the core services staff to provide an effective and responsive service. It is, however, challenging. The following sections will endeavour to present a framework which could be used to understand FM services in order to address the aforementioned soft issues. This framework focuses on the „lowest level‟ of the FM service, i.e. day to day operational level.

AN INTEGRATIVE MODEL OF KM, FM AND PM A model that allows for the adoption of a holistic view of FM and KM in order to achieve the desired results of an organisation was developed for this paper (see Fig 1). The model tries to integrate both core and non-core (FM) services in achieving the organisational goals and objectives. As has been described in the previous sections, FM provides the necessary infrastructure and bolsters to create an appropriate environment for the employees to perform the core functions efficiently. Through the process of knowledge management, intangible assets of FM organisations are better recognised and exploited to create value and knowledge both internally and externally for the benefit of the organisation (Davenport and Prusak, 2003). Knowledge management facilitates improved communication within teams to provide informed insightful advice to senior managers and top hierarchy of the organisation. Knowledge management also focus on improved sharing of best practice, lesson learned, system engineering methodologies and the rationale for strategic decision making. Failure to capture and transfer knowledge leads to the increased risk of „reinventing the wheel‟, wasted activity, and impaired organisational performance. Successful knowledge management could overcome learning barriers, in FM organisations, through instilling a learning and knowledge sharing environment, providing vision and effective leadership and initiating knowledge sharing reward systems (Egbu et al, 2003). This type of change results in performance improvement for effectiveness in FM organisations.

Fig 1: An Integrative Model of FM, KM & PM

For FM to be effective it should be viewed as an integral part of the services of any organisation regardless of the business function of the said organisation. According to Kincaid (1994) integration of FM as an effective function for an organisation can be achieved by recognising the following characteristics of FM: -

FM is a support role within an organisation, or a support service to an organisation; FM must link strategically, tactically and operationally to other support activities and primary activities to create value; and Within FM, managers must be equipped with knowledge of facilities and management to carry out their integrated support role.

However, FM can be made integral to the organisational services when there is improved coordination and communication among the core and FM services staff. This allows key functions to be performed as and when required. Improved coordination and communication can be achieved through an approach of knowledge management. Improving coordination and communication requires a no blame culture and KM can be used to create this „no blame culture‟ through employee encouragement in sharing knowledge. This will provide an opportunity in achieving the following: -

mutual recognition and information exchange regarding objectives and planned outcomes improvement of skills and competencies which could ultimately lead to effectiveness and efficiency of practices of employees of the organisation avoid duplication of mistakes through sharing of experiences avoid gaps or repetition of work through effective communication

The model also tries to emphasise the importance of Performance Management (PM) approaches to achieve the desired results of an organisation. Performance refers to accomplishments of doing the work as well as being about the results achieved and this need to be managed. Selection of suitable performance measures to reflect the actual levels of performance of the organisation can be considered as one of the challenges. It is always needed to choose what is to be measured appropriately, rather than choosing what is easy to measure. This would require a proper benchmarking system. Benchmarking is a structured and focused approach for comparing with others how organisational services are provided and the performance levels achieved. The purpose of the comparisons enables organisations to identify where and how they can do better. Having an unsuitable benchmarking system can result in taking incorrect judgements and can eventually result in compromising the quality of the organisational services. Importantly, PM also provides the opportunity to assess the degree of collaboration of the core and FM services. All these can subsequently result in improving quality of the services of the organisation concerned. The inclusion of PM to the model above provides an opportunity to achieve the following:

-

measure progress towards achieving organisational objectives and targets promote benchmarking practices in order to compare performance with the past levels of performance and among organisations promote service improvement through corrective actions

KM FOR IMPROVED FM - OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Integrating KM into FM has many advantages as stated above. However, there are some challenges and issues to be addressed in adopting this model to the actual context of an organisation. Issues that need to be addressed from the model above are: Efficiency, Quality and Ability to Reach Targets KM ensures that best practices and lessons learnt are available organisational wide. The goal is to (re)use this knowledge in order to prevent facilities managers from reinventing the wheel each time they need knowledge. This type of knowledge has been shown to result in cost savings of about 15 to 20 per cent (Tissen et al., 2000). This is imperative in improving the ability to reach targets of an organisation, i.e. the expected goals and objectives. Knowledge allows work to be carried out efficiently while employees‟ expertise, skills and competencies can be used to do the work effectively. This in turn results in improving quality of the organisation. As the Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force (1999) affirms, quality means doing the right thing at the right time, in the right way, for the right person and having the best possible results/outcomes. According to Philip Crosby (cited in Katz and Green, 1997), a pioneer of Quality Management (QM), quality is conformance to requirements. Thus achieving the expected results/targets efficiently and effectively improve quality. The Creation of an ‘Appropriate’ Culture Getting an „appropriate‟ culture within an FM organization for KM is typically the most important and yet often the most difficult challenge. For KM to be successfully implemented for improved FM performance there is a requirement for an organisational culture that constantly guides employees to strive for knowledge. KM is fundamentally about employees sharing their knowledge with each other and there should be an enabling organisational environment that ensures that these employees are comfortable about sharing what they know. This organisational culture ensures that there is a high degree of emotional safety that employees experience in their working relationship in an FM organisation. This is achieved through trust. Knowledge will only be transported across an organisation if employees have the necessary level of trust within and across the various teams. This trust, and its creation, has been called the most vital prerequisite of knowledge exchange because it involves vulnerability .e.g. reputation, self-esteem, etc. Vulnerability and the need for trust are higher where tasks are interdependent, such as in FM organisations. It is therefore important to create a culture that will appropriately encourage and promote KM. The organisational culture should be such that there is an expectation that knowledge is part of employees‟ job, a „no-blame‟ culture when mistakes are made, celebration of accomplishments and positive attitude towards change.

In-house Training There should be an organisation-wide policy to increase KM proficiency through training. The aim of training is to change behaviour at the workplace in order to stimulate efficiency and higher performance standards (Cowling and Mailer, 1990). Training programs yield many direct benefits such as enhanced problem-solving skills, a more competent and efficient workforce, fewer recruitment problems in obtaining qualified employees and fewer problems with employee relations. Training program also communicate to employees that the organisation is concerned about their wellbeing (Wells and Spinks, 1996). Training can be on-the-job training or in the classroom/in training facilities by instructors. Training on-the-job or in-house is highly favoured by the Japanese because its emphasis is on demonstration, learning by doing and imitating the teacher. The employee works, learns and develops expertise at the same time. Much of the learning can take place naturally through day-to-day contacts (Armstrong, 2003). This is very useful in training employees in those competencies which are required if the organisation is to use knowledge as a means of production. The three most important competencies that employees have to learn and be trained in are (Tissen et al., 2000): 1. Competencies that help us learn from information 2. Competencies that help us improve our thinking and 3. Social competencies that help us interact better with our colleagues and the world around us. Empowerment The culture of empowerment can be related to the development among organisations to reduce hierarchical formation, which inevitably leads to more decisions being made at lower levels of the organisation (Clegg, 1990; Skyles et al, 1997). Empowerment represents a shift towards a greater emphasis upon trust and commitment in the work place which involves the devolution of various degrees of decision-making power and responsibility (Pastor, 1997). Empowerment promotes improved productivity and quality, leads to better utilisation of skill and innovative capabilities, greater job satisfaction, breed organisational loyalty, reduce operating costs, allows greater flexibility, and improves motivation (Swenson, 1997; Mullins and Peacock, 1991; Sashkin, 1984). Empowerment can be applied at the individual, group and organisational levels – either separately or all together (Nonaka, 1994). Giving employees their autonomy presents a peculiar challenge to FM organizations. On one hand, FM organizations that are committed to implementing KM want employees to behave autonomously and to be co-operative so that they can share their knowledge with each other and the organization. On the other, they want to ensure that this autonomy is employed for the benefit of the organization and not for slacking or chasing the employee‟s personal goals (Newell et al., 2002). 360-Degree Feedback It is a multi-source assessment or multi-rater feedback. This involves collecting performance data of an individual employee or group and it is normally derived from a number of stakeholders (Ward, 1995). The data collected is usually fed back in the form of ratings against various performance dimensions (Armstrong, 2003). The benefits of

this are that individuals get a broader perspective of how they are perceived by others than previously possible, increase awareness of and relevance of competencies, increase awareness by senior management that they too have development needs, encouraging more open feedback and provided a clearer picture to senior management of individual‟s real worth. This process is very crucial for the success of KM for improved FM because it has the active support of top management who themselves take part in giving and receiving feedback and encourage all employees to do the same. Also a culture of openness and communication is reinforced by ensuring that no one feels threatened by the process. This is usually achieved by making feedback anonymous and/or getting a third-party facilitator to deliver the feedback. The challenges to this process are lack of action following feedback, over-reliance on technology and too much bureaucracy. But this can always be minimized by communication, training and follow-up (Armstrong, 2003).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As facilities management is now gaining greater recognition and acceptance as a significant influence upon organisational success and goal achievement which can enhance business performance there is a need to improve its performance through knowledge management. Knowledge management can be used to deliver sustained achievements to organisations by improving the performance of the people who work for them. This might involve: 1. raising the awareness among the employees and encouraging them to share knowledge 2. Clear guidelines and policies to guide the employees towards an integrated environment of core and FM services 3. Instigating a suitable performance management approach 4. Proper feedback mechanisms to inform employees as well as the top management. While KM in FM has been deemed important this has been relatively under studied by researchers. Research in this area has the potential to contribute to an improved understanding of how to continue to exploit KM for improved FM performance.

REFERENCES Alexander, K. (1994). Facilities Management. Centre of Facilities Management (CFM). Blenheim Publishing Alexander, K. (1996). Facilities Management - Theory and Practice. London: E & FN Spon. Allee, V. (1997) 12 Principles of Knowledge Management. Training & Development. Vol. 51 (11), pp.71-74. Armstrong, 2003 Armstrong, M. (2003). A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. London: Kogan Page.

Army Knowledge Online (1999) An intelligent approach to mission success. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of the Army. Arora, R. (2002) Implementing KM - a balanced score card approach. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 6 (3), pp.240-249. Barrett, P. (1995). Facilities Management: Towards best practice. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd. Barrett, P. and D. Baldry (2003). Facilities Management: Towards Best Practice. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd. Clegg, S. R. (1990) Modern Organisations: Organisation Studies in a Post-modern World. London: Sage Publishing. Cowlin, A. and Mailer, C. (1990) Managing Human Resources. London: Edward Arnold. Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. (1998) Working Knowledge - How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Egbu, C., Kurul, E., Quintas, P., Hutchinson, V., Anumba, C., Al-Ghassani, A and Ruikar, K. (2003) Knowledge production, sources and capabilities in the construction industry. www.knowledgemanagement.uk.net. Accessed on 17/03/03. Fielder, I. R. What is Facilities Management. Essex: British Institute of Facilities Management. http://www.bifm.org.uk. Accessed on 03/02/2004 Golzen, G. (1998). Knowledge Management: The Opportunities and Threats for HR. Human Resource Management International Digest. Vol. 6 (2), pp.20-22. Gourlay, S. (2001) Knowledge Management and HRD. Human Resource Development International. Vol. 4 (1), pp.27-46. Hislop, D. (2003) Linking Human Resource Management and Knowledge Management via Commitment. Employee Relations. Vol. 25 (2), pp.182-202. Katz, J. M. and E. Green (1997). Managing Quality: A guide to system-wide Performance Management in Healthcare.2nd Edition. Missouri: Mosby. Kelly, G (1955) The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton. Kennedy, A. (1996). Support Services. In: Alexander, K. ed. Facilities Management theory and practice. London: E & FN Spon, pp.134 - 145 Kincaid, D. G. (1994). Measuring Performance in Facilities Management. Facilities Vol. 12 (6), pp. 17-20 Lank, E. (1997) Leveraging Invisible assets: The human factor. Long Range Planning. Vol. 30 (3), pp.406-412. Mullins, L. J and Peacock, A. (1991) Managing through people: regulating the employment relationship. Administrator. December, pp. 32-33. Newell, S; Robertson, M; Scarbrough, H and Swan, J. (2002) Managing Knowledge Work. New York: Plalgrave.

Nonaka, I. (1994) A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation, Organization Science. Vol. 5, pp. 14-37. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pastor, J. (1997) Empowerment: What it is and what it is not. Empowerment in Organisations. Vol. 4 (2), pp. 5-7. Payne, T. (2002). Prescription for Change. HEFMA. http://www.hefma.org.uk/refbook/prescriptionchange64.htm Accessed on 12/06/2003. Robathan, P. (1996). Building Performance. In: Alexander, K. ed. Facilities Management -Theory and Practice. London, E & FN Spon: pp. 98 - 109 Sashkin, M. (1984) Participative management is an ethical imperative. Organisational Dynamics. Vol. 12, pp. 5-22. Scottish Executive Action Plan, (2002). Action Plan to tackle HAI. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/pages/news/2002/10/SEhd210.aspx. Accessed on 15/03/2003 Skyes, G., Simpsom, M and Shipley, E. (1997), Training and empowerment improve performance: a case study. Integrated manufacturing Systems. Vol. 8 (2), pp. 90-102. Swenson, D. X. (1997) Requisite conditions for team empowerment. Empowerment in Organisations. Vol. 5(1). TFPL (1999) Skills for knowledge management: building a knowledge economy. London: TFPL Ltd The Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force (QuIC). (1999). What is Quality. http://www.consumer.gov/qualityhealth/index.html. Accessed on 20/09/2003 Tissen. R, Andriessen. D and Deprez. F (2000) The Knowledge Dividend – creating high performance companies through value-based knowledge management. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited. Ward, P (1995) A 360-degree turn for the better. People Management. February, pp. 2022. Wells, B. and Spinks, N. (1997) Fifteen Steps to a Complete Human Resource Program. Management Development Review. Vol. 10, pp. 37-39. Williams, B. (1994). Facilities Economics. Kent: Building Economics Bureau Ltd. Williams, B. (2001). Facilities Economics in the European Union. Kent: Building Economics Bureau Ltd.