Knowledge Management Methods

Knowledge Management Methods Pl?~©un©~~ ~fPfPl?©~©[fu®® u© rMJ~rru~@nrru® ~[ft)©W~®@J®®

Karl M. Wiig

l

Published and Distributed by SCHEMA PRESS, LTD. 7101 Lake Powell Drive Arlington, TX 76016 Phone: (817) 572-6254 Fax: (817)478-1048 e-mail: [email protected] Copyright © 1995 by Karl M. Wiig Chapter 9 Copyright © 1995 by Dianna Newbern and Donald F. Dansereau Chapter 13 Copyright © 1995 by Karen M. Gardner Chapter 19 Copyright© 1995 by Rob van der Spek and Robert de Hoog

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this material may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from SCHEMA PRESS, LTD. or the respective chapter authors. ISBN 0-9638925-2-5 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 93-92802

The three volumes in this series are: Volume I

Knowledge Management Foundations -- Thinking about Thinking -How People and Organizations Create, Represent, and Use Knowledge ISBN 0-9638925-0-9 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 93-92803

Volume 2

Knowledge Management The Central Management Focus for Intelligent-Acting Organizations ISBN 0-9638925-1-7 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 93-92804

Volume 3 Knowledg~

Management Methods

Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge ISBN 0-9638925-2-5 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 93-92802

Three-Volume Set ISBN 0-9638925-3-3

Printing: 5 6 7 8 9 10

2001 2002 2003

Knowledge Management Methods Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge

KariM. Wiig

Q SCHEMA PRESS

Arlington, Texas

Contents Page Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Acknowledgments . ............................................. xiii Foreword for Volume 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv Preface ...................................................... XVII

Part I. Some Knowledge Management Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

Chapter 1. What Knowledge Management Is All about·· Some Perspectives What Is Knowledge Management? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Management's Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 3 5 6 7 8 13

Knowledge Management Occurs on Three Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Five Subject Areas of Knowledge Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Examples of Knowledge-Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Knowledge Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Knowledge Professional's Role in Comprehensive Knowledge Management .............................................. 15 The Knowledge Management Team and Its Proficiency Profile Potential Needs for Outside Assistance

Chapter 2. Considerations for Hands-On Knowledge Management Work. . 19 Some Characteristics of Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Five Knowledge-Related Dimensions............................. ID Knowledge Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Knowledge Forms and Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . !!> Knowledge-Intensive Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CZl Quality Knowledge-Intensive Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Work Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Knowledge Professionals Must Maintain Many Perspectives and Reference Models ................................................. 33 Reference Models for the Knowledge Management Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Other Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Gaining Knowledge Worker Confidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Generic Tasks and Other Work Break-Down Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Part II. Business and Management Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

Chapter 3. Knowledge Management both Supports and Relies on Strategy Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 A Knowledge Management Planning Framework ................. 39

Knowledge Management Methods:

iv

Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge Page

Establish Knowledge-Related Threats, Opportunities, Strengths, and Weaknesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 A TOWS Strategy Development Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 In Preparation for the Strategy Session The Session Continued Tasks FOLLOW-UP After the Session

On Premises and Master Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 Premises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 Knowledge-Related Strategy and Master Plan Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 Introduction Master Plans Major Master Plan Elements New Analysis Approaches and Talents Are Required. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Service Paradigms ........................................... Chapter 4. Fitting Knowledge Management Squarely into the Enterprise. . Management Initiatives and Knowledge Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizational Knowledge Management Program Examples . . . . . . . .

54 57 57 58 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Examples of Brief Program Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Effectiveness Improvement Programs Knowledge Building Programs Strategic Action Programs Project Management Programs Human Resource Programs Programs Where Knowledge Dimension Might Be Included Explicitly

A Knowledge Management Program

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

Umax's Business Situation - Current Status Business Situation - The Needs Objective and Scope Approach - Foundation Approach - Work Program Deliverables Requirements

Starting Knowledge-Based System Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 General Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Specific Recommendations for Next Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Continue "Grass-Roots» Introduction Program Develop Portfolio of Important KBS Applications Secure Senior Management Collaboration and Support Build the KBS Technical Staff

Chapter 5. Estimating Costs, Benefits, and Risks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Identifying and Appraising Benefits with Causal Representations: An Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Some Aspects of Benefit Appraisals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Contents

v

Page

Direct and Indirect Benefits Tangible and Intangible Benefits Benefit Analysis Is Closely Tied to Conceptualization

Benefit Streams and Their Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Collaborate with Managers and Professionals in the Target Area . . . . . . . . . . . Cyclical Event Chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

f57 88

A Complex Benefit Analysis Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 An Example -- The Men's Department. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Utilities and Risks -- Assess Priorities for Various Options

. .. ... .. ... ...

93

Part ill. Hands-On Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m Chapter 6. Basic Knowledge Survey Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 The Realm of Hands-On Knowledge Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 Knowledge Survey Alternatives-- An Overview .................... 101 Focused One-Time Knowledge Surveys and Audits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Questionnaire-Based Surveys "Walk-Around" Knowledge Surveys Critical Knowledge Function (CKF) Surveys Middle Management Target Group Sessions Task Environment Analysis and Modeling; Business Process Redesign Strategic Management of Knowledge (SMK) Special Staff and Management Activities Focused on Knowledge Surveys ...... 106 Corporate Knowledge (Skill) Inventories -- Human Resources Surveys on Available and Missing Knowledge and Expertise Regular Strategic Task Force Surveys and Knowledge Circles Knowledge Management Function within Operating Division Middle Managers Identifying and Pursuing Critical Knowledge Functions Regular Operational and Management Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Human Resources Planning for Careers, Succession, and Personnel Strategies Personnel Reviews Annual Planning for Corporate Products and Services Ad Hoc and Unscheduled Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Bottom-Up Approach-- Knowledge Workers Identify Opportunities Operations Improvement Campaigns Executive Top-Down Approach

Questionnaire-Based Knowledge Surveys and Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Surveys Conducted with Questionnaires or Structured Interviews Questionnaire-Based Knowledge Surveys

Middle Management Target Group Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Example Session Agenda

Overview of Different Methods .................................. 116 Chapter 7. Critical Knowledge Functions ........................... 121 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Critical Knowledge Functions -- What They Are -- and How to Find Them . . . . . 121 Characterization of Critical Knowledge Functions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Finding Critical Knowledge Functions -- CKFA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Worksheets Facilitate CKF Analysis

vi

Knowledge Management Methods: Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge Page

Chapter 8. Ethnography, Interviews, Task Environment Analyses, and Basic Knowledge Analysis ...................................... 129 Ethnographic Analysis for Knowledge Management ................ 129 Ethnographic Interviews for Knowledge-Focused Task Environment Analysis

A Guide to Knowledge Analysis Interviews ....................... 131 General Guide to Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Knowledge-Focused Interview Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 Knowledge-Focused Task Environment Analysis .................. 132 The Task Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Task Environment Analysis Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

Basic Knowledge Analysis ..................................... 139 Questions for Knowledge Analysis Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example Contents of Knowledge Basic Analysis Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Knowledge Analysis Can Become Very Comprehensive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Knowledge Analysis Scope Should Fit the Circumstances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alternate Knowledge-Gathering Approaches ...................... Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Protocol Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

141 144 144 145 148 148 149 149

Recording and Transcription Issues ............................. 150 Audiorecording Videorecording Transcription Analyzing Transcripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Transcript Parsing

Knowledge Material Repositories ............................... 154 A Knowledge Material Library Is Required

Chapter 9. Knowledge Maps for Knowledge Management .............. 157 Criteria for Evaluating Knowledge Map Systems .................. 157 Fidelity of the Gathered Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Knowledge Gathering Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Towards the End Product: Knowledge Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Knowledge Maps: The Core of the TCU Knowledge Map System ....... 159 System Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Nodes Labeled Links Spatial Configuration Map Units

From Cognitive Science: A Look at Research ..................... 164 The TCU Knowledge Map System ............................... 166 1. Set Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 2. Identify Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 3. Gather Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Instructions: Relationship-Guided Search 4. Construct Draft Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5. Evaluation by the Experts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Contents

vii Page

6. Alternatives to Knowledge Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Overview Maps; Detail Maps; Summary Maps Ad Hoc Maps Archival Maps Dynamic Features; Descriptive Features,· Instructional Features 7. Finalize the Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 8. Software for Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

How Does the TCU Knowledge Map System Measure up? ............ 173 Review of Evaluation Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Knowledge Gathering Critique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Format Critique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 A Real-Life Example ......................................... 176 Chapter 10. Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis ............... 181 What Is Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis? ............... 181 The KURA Process ........................................ 182 Knowledge Element Analysis -- Detailed Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 Make Recommendations for Knowledge-Related Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Examples of KURA Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Expected Benefits from Performing KURA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Examples of Detailed KURA Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Chapter 11. Knowledge Scripting and Profiling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 A Multi-Perspective View ..................................... 195 Introducing Knowledge Scripting and Profiling ................... 196 Proficiency Levels and Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 Knowledge Profiles .......................................... 200 A Knowledge Scripting and Profiling Example ..................... 203 Some Comments on Knowledge Required for K-1 Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 Knowledge, Skills, and Personal Characteristics Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 A Perspective of Knowledge-Intensive Scripts and Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Knowledge Profiles Provide Insight into Needed Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

Chapter 12. Knowledge Flows .................................... 211 Analyzing Knowledge Flows ................................... 211 What Is Knowledge Flow Analysis? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 A Case History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Positive and Negative Knowledge Flows in Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 Four Knowledge Flow Functions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

The Four Knowledge Flow Dimensions ........................... 220 Dimension 1: Do the Job! Make Knowledge Available and Apply It to Make Products and Provide Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dimension 2: Do the Job Better! Improve Workers' Application Knowledge ..... Dimension 3: Improve the Work Function and Work Practices! Learn and Work Effectively to Change and Improve the System of Production and Service . Dimension 4: Improve Products and Services! Build, Organize, and Use Knowledge to Renew and Improve Products and Services and Create New Ones.

223

226 229 232

Other Aspects of Knowledge Flows .............................. 234

viii

Knowledge Management Methods: Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge

Page

234 235 235 236 2:37 2:37 238 Chapter 13. Object-Oriented KADS Approach to Knowledge Management . 241 Knowledge Management -- A Position Statement ................... 241 Cognitive Modeling of Business Practices ......................... 24.3 How Important Are Knowledge Flows?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Knowledge Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Undesirable Knowledge Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hurdles to Knowledge Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Knowledge Flow Facilitators ..... ·~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Knowledge Flow Analysis Deliverables>. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Support Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Business Practice Modeling and Reengineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizations as Results-Oriented, Knowledge-Using, and Problem-Solving Organisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cognitive Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Core Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recognizing a Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Establishing Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cognitive Modeling Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lessons-Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

244 244

245 245 248

249 249 255 Chapter 14. Knowledge Management Supports Business Process Redesign 2E7 On Business Process Redesign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 What Is "Business Process Redesign"? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Some BPR Considerations and Premises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 BPR Comprehensiveness -- Three Options BPR Goals Is CREATIVITY Part of BPR? How Radically Different Solutions Can We Propose?

The Basic BPR Approach ..................................... 263 BPR Projects Need "Process Owners" and Guidance Committees Incorporating Knowledge-Related Perspectives into BPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

UNDERSTAND Phase: Analysis ............................... 265 Analysis Must Be Both Detailed and Global . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Analysis Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basic Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of the Analysis Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Important Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Role of "Category Theory" in Business Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis Areas and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

268 270 271 271 272 273

The "Interpretative Framework" -- Emerging Visions for the Redesigned Business Process .............................. 274 REDESIGN Phase: Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... 275 The Redesign Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 General Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 Redesign Phase -- Task Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 1. Set Target Mission Objectives

ix

Contents

Page

2. Describe and Rank Design Issues (Design Requirements) Documentation of Potential Benefits Must Not Be Overlooked! 3. Define Functional Features 4. Develop the Building Block Inventory 5. Identify Options for How to Deal with Design Issues 6. Create Alternate Scenarios 7. Design Review -- Design Session B. Modify, Reexamine, and Decide on How to Proceed 9. Evaluate Chosen Scenario 10. Prepare for Implementation Phase

Additional Considerations ..................................... 289 Team Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 What Actually Is the Role of the BPR Team?-- Willi Be Judged as Having Contributed Properly if My Recommendation Is Not Followed? Team Capabilities Examples of Building Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Building Blocks to Create Knowledge Building Blocks to Disseminate Knowledge

Part W. Selected Knowledge Management Solutions ............

293

Chapter 15. ''Lessons-Learned" and Knowledge Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 "Lessons-Learned" Programs .................................. 295 An Approach To Establishing a "Lessons-Learned" System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Knowledge Inventory Systems .................................. 2m Categories of Expertise Characterization of Proficiency Pivot Individuals Basic Information Sets Building the Knowledge Inventory Database -- Collecting and Estimating Proficiencies in Pertinent Knowledge Areas Examples of Expertise Categories and Expertise Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Approach to Encoding Highly Specialized Expertise Categorization System for Encoding the Breadth of a Person's Knowledge End-User Applications for Knowledge Inventory Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Smart Knowledge Inventory Systems Applications for Nominating Project Staff Applications for Planning of Professional Staff Education Additional Summaries of Selected End-User Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Visualizing Strengths and Weaknesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Is Visualization? Visualization Approaches Individual Factors Composite Factors Bracketing Visualization Using Polar Diagrams Visualization Using Proportional Icons Visualization Using Indicator "Faces"

301

304

309 311


X

Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge

Page

Chapter 16. Knowledge Communication ........................... 321 Some Aspects of Learning Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 Five Stages of Learning Seven Basic Learning Strategies

A Model for Effective Teaching ................................. 323 Some Aspects of the Effective Teaching Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326

Communication Modes for Knowledge-Transfer ................... 3'Zl Open-Loop and Closed-Loop Communication Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Communications Must Be Accepted, Not Just Received!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Achieving the Effect We Intend Factors that Influence Communications Acceptance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Passive and Active Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3'Zl 330

The "Lo-Tech I Hi-Tech" Dimension of Knowledge-Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Issue: The Knowledge-Transfer Pipeline Is Full! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perspectives Influencing Transfer-Mode Selections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recipient's Perspective Knowledge Providers' Perspectives Technologists' Perspectives Management's Perspectives Different Modes of Knowledge-Transfers ............................. Knowledge-Transfer Mode Strengths and Weaknesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Criteria for Assessing Knowledge-Transfer Suitability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluating Knowledge-Transfer Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

338 339 340

332 333 Chapter 17. Transform Knowledge and Distribute It to Points-of-Action .. 335 Knowledge-Transfer Modes .................................... 335 Transferring Expert Knowledge to the Point-of-Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335

343 346 351 352

Two Knowledge-Transfer Program Examples ...................... 353 A Central Services Knowledge-Transfer Program ....................... 353 Working Hypothesis and Assumptions Service Paradigm General Tasks Required to Develop the Transfer Program Knowledge-Transfer Modes Compile, Transform, and Disseminate Knowledge A Multi-Mode Knowledge-Transfer Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359 Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361

Chapter 18. Knowledge Architecture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363 Knowledge Organization Is Vital ............................... 363 A Bureaucratic Knowledge Architecture ......................... 364 Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 Organizing Principles (Level II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Knowledge Architecture (Level III) ........................ A Knowledge Flow and Work Flow Model ......................... Knowledge Architecture Elements (Level IV) .......................... The Knowledge Management Executive: Plan and Direct Knowledge Use and Development

366 368 300 371

Contents

XI

Page

Knowledge Architecture Management Function: Create Agents, Develop, Maintain, and Operate the KA Active Knowledge Agents Knowledge Bases and Knowledge Encyclopedia Knowledge Lexicon Knowledge Dictionary Knowledge Agent Consultation Modes Architectural Considerations for Communication Between Knowledge-Based Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377

Chapter 19. A Framework for a Knowledge Management Methodology.... 379 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379 Introduction ................................................ 380 Methodological Pyramid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 Levels of Knowledge Management .............................. 383 Knowledge Management Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 The Knowledge Management Cycle Knowledge Object Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385 Coupling the Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389

An Initial Proposal for a Framework ............................. Identification of Bottlenecks .................................... Definition of Goals for Knowledge Management Activities ............ Conclusion .................................................

3W 3W 392 393

Appendices A. Worksheet Examples ........................................ 397 Al. Cost-Benefit Worksheets ................................... 397 A2. Example of Questionnaire-Based Survey ...................... 4{)7 A3. Critical Knowledge Function Worksheets ..................... 409 A4. Lessons-Learned Worksheets ............................... 421 A5. Example Knowledge Inventory System Worksheets ............. 429 A6. Knowledge-Transfer Criteria Worksheets ..................... 435 A7. Business Process Redesign Worksheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439 B. TOWS Analysis for Alpha Corporation's Knowledge-Based Systems Strategy •• An Example ............................................... 441 Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Weaknesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planning Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tactical Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Premises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

441 442

443 443 444

445 445 446

C. Office of the Future -A 1997 Scenario ........................... 449 Aspects of the Administrative Assistant's Workday . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

xii

Knowledge Management Methods: Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge Page

Changes in Mary's Workday Design Engineer Scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452 Changes in Paul's Workday Postamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453

D. References and Further Readings ............................... 457 E. Glossary and Definitions ..................................... 4ffi Index ........................................................ 481

Acknowledgments This series could not have been created without the help and support by many parties. Primarily, it has been made possible by the unwavering support by my wife, Elisabeth, who from her research, provided me with many of the ideas expressed in all three books and who taught me much about how people think, reason, and differ depending on their make-up. And more importantly, she taught me what love is, and how it relates to our human condition and performance. I owe much to my parents who taught me to be curious, to think, to understand that value can only be realized after the task is completed, and that it is permissible to have fun! My coworkers have helped me realize much of the complexity that real challenges present and how to perceive and deal with them. Sue Stafford and Helen Ojha in particular pulled me into the areas of philosophy and social sciences that I had never discovered and that have direct bearing on the topics in this book. They also showed me how these disciplines can be applied directly in the "real world." Many others have helped shape the insights that led to perspectives on the practical role of knowledge. My managers during many years, David Boodman and Martin Ernst, allowed me to attack challenges that "nobody should be paid to work on" -- they were that fun, educational, and difficult. Without my clients who continually have posed incredibly interesting and challenging problems, I would have little understanding of the importance that knowledge plays in the modem organization. The insights, concerns, and encouragement that my clients in many industries, many settings, and six continents have provided me with over the years, have been invaluable. My clients have also taught me how little I know -- and how bright they are and how difficult it is for them to balance the multitude of conflicting requirements they have to deal with. My editor, Kirsten McBride, have provided invaluable help to make this series ofbooks readable-- in spite of my continued attempts to the opposite!

xiii

XIV


Special thanks go to my colleagues who have been willing to share their approaches and insights as chapter authors in this book. Their contributions, I think, provide sorely needed perspectives to bring broader understanding and insights for you, the readers.

Fore~ord

for Volunte 3

This book is intended for hands-on practitioners who support knowledge management initiatives within their own organizations. It is our firm belief that all organizations that take serious their role as knowledge-intensive enterprises need to be self-sufficient in their ability to use knowledge management methods. Hands-on management of knowledge requires that practicing knowledge professionals have access to a wide range of approaches and methodologies. The objectives and condition vary widely in the different knowledge-related situations that will need to be addressed and the solutions tend to touch upon every aspect of the organizations involved. As a result, the knowledge professionals must possess significant flexibility and versatility. At this time -- in 1995 -- the fields of knowledge management and knowledge engineering are still evolving and new tools and approaches are regularly introduced. Nevertheless, a solid body of suitable methods exists, making it both possible and effective for organizations to undertake work in the area. There is, however, not yet a great deal of literature available to help knowledge professionals. It is the purpose of this book to present some of the methods that knowledge professionals have developed and use to conduct hands-on knowledge management work. The book does not aspire to cover all applicable methods. Nor do we think that all appropriate methods are known to us and we, therefore, will certainly have omitted many. However, the basic body of practical approaches presented here will allow practitioners to perform even complicated knowledge management work with the thoroughness and effectiveness that is desired. The methods and general approaches treated in this book are thought to be different in application from many past practices. Therefore, we judge them to be important for knowledgefocused work. We have intentionally omitted coverage of "knowledge acquisition" methods for development of knowledge-based systems and related areas. These methods receive excellent treatment elsewhere and are often well understood

XVI


by knowledge engineers and other knowledge professionals. From our perspective, these methods may be considered to be a discipline by itself. Those methods are also under constant development. Arlington, Texas, 1995

Preface The worldwide industrial and economic transformations that are now taking place have already led to significant upheavals for both workers and professionals in nearly all fields. More critical than the worker issues, however, are the tremendous societal restructuring that has taken place and which many perceive to be permanent. The turmoil stems from several factors: greater pressures to increase product quality and decrease costs; basic and frequent changes in business practices and consumer and hightechnology products; price wars in most segments of the world economy; and crucial and often painful shifts in markets, policies, and economic structures caused by a worldwide recession. Many of these changes and the underlying factors are discussed in-depth by Drucker, who argues that we already have started a transition into the global "knowledge society"-- although we do not yet understand what that entails, and probably will not really have a good grasp overview of what is happening for several decades.* These changes have a profound impact on the complexity of the workplace, requiring higher levels of knowledge and skills on the part of every individual who wishes to hold a responsible job and every organization that wishes to be consistently successful. Although we face enormous challenges in general education to prepare entrants to the job market, the greatest challenge lies in the need to reeducate our current workforce. Given the rapid changes and advances in most fields, skills and techniques learned more than a decade ago are inadequate to compete in today's job market. In the face of these challenges, the major defense for organizations is to manage knowledge on a broad basis -- to educate, build their internal knowledge base, pool and deploy the knowledge they have, invest in the development of new and proprietary knowledge, and put their knowledge to use as effectively as possible. These books are about a new set of foundations for management methods. Specifically, it is about what knowledge is, and how business can use

* Peter Drucker (1993), in his book Post-Capitalist Society, provides extensive discussions of the transition to a "knowledge society."

xviii


knowledge, harness, enhance, and manage it to the maximum benefit to the organization. The central premise behind knowledge management (KM) is that all the factors that lead to superior performance -- organizational creativity, operational effectiveness, and quality of products and services -- are improved when better knowledge is made available and used competently. While this premise supports the management philosophies and corporate cultures of highly successful companies, it is in direct contrast to traditional Taylorism.** KM complements and must be considered in combination with modern management methods such as Dr. Deming's Total Quality Management.*** In short, the KM perspectives, approaches, and methods help promote and enhance such practices as: • Business process redesign or reengineering • Enterprisewide integrated operations • Participative management with empowerment of all knowledge workers • Total quality management (TQM) and quality function deployment (QFD) • Collaborative workstyles • Supportive work environment and corporate culture Knowledge management programs provide the organization with powerful processes that allow its managers to use innovative ways to support their pursuit of leadership. When considering the value of KM, we need to define what we mean by "knowledge." In particular, it must be seen in contrast to "information." To avoid misconceptions, we must differentiate between the two terms using an operational definition such as the following: Knowledge consists of facts, truths, and beliefs, perspectives and concepts,

** "Taylorism" refers to the operation and management practices advocated by the "father" of scientific management, Frederick W. Taylor (1856-1915). A description of Taylorism may be found in Craig Littler, "Understanding Taylorism," in British Journal of Sociology 29 (1978, pp. 185-207). Taylor and Western practitioners of "rational approach to management" (nearly all companies), are argued to have promoted the view that workers should be told explicitly what to do and not be encouraged to use their own knowledge and ideas to change or improve work practices or work process. According to that view, workers who improve these areas on their own are counterproductive and such worker involvements are discouraged. According to Drucker (1993), however, this is a totally incorrect interpretation of Taylor's work and philosophy. In reality, Taylor promoted worker participation and ownership -directions that were threatening to both management and labor at the time. He was consequently vilified and intentionally misinterpreted, resulting in the general misrepresentation mentioned above. *** Dr. Deming's management method is described very readably by Walton (1986), and in greater detail by Deming (1986).

Preface

xix

judgments and expectations, methodologies and know-how. Knowledge is accumulated and integrated and held over longer periods to be available to be applied to handle specific situations and problems. Information consists of facts and data that are organized to describe a particular situation or condition. Knowledge is subsequently applied to interpret the available information about a particular situation and to decide how to manage it. We use knowledge to determine what a particular situation means. By sharing some of the perspectives and approaches we have found to be useful, we hope that these books will generate visions for new ways of doing business based on different uses of knowledge. The books are partially motivated by the concern that in most U.S. companies knowledge and expertise are not recognized as directly manageable assets. Thus, most managers express that they do not know how to characterize, appraise, or manage knowledge explicitly and actively even though we are becoming a knowledge-based, postindustrial society where knowledge and expertise play a more important role than ever before. This concern was strongly substantiated by the results of a small survey of chief executives of Fortune 50 companies in 1989. Major questions confront any manager who introduces new management methods or who advocates change. Introduction of KM is no different. Some of the questions that must be addressed are: • What is KM all about? • Is it worth for me to consider KM at this time? • Which business advantages might we realize from active KM? • Which experiences have others had, and where should we start? • What are the risks and pitfalls? • How do we determine the value of KM, and how do I justify it? • Which framework exists for KM and which paradigm can I adopt to "wrap my arms" around this concept and for important knowledge situations that require my attention? • Which KM approaches and methodologies are available, and how practical are they? • How does KM relate to existing programs and management activities? How does it differ from, and complement, what we are doing already? • What are expert systems and how do they support KM? These are complex questions but hopefully the treatment of these issues will be of help to the manager who wants to succeed in the competitive game and to

XX


do so with confidence and decisiveness. These books are intended for managers who want to build, not dismantle. They are not for managers who manage with short-term "cash-cow" attitudes in hand-to-mouth existence. Rather, the concepts presented are for managers who work to build the strength of the organization to excel for a longer time in the global business environment. They are for managers who want to change their organizations by improving their processes and letting people work smarter and by exploiting the organization's strengths without depleting its resources. These books are the result of varied experiences, the last 24 years in management consulting. In the 1960s I had the opportunity to work with applied research and application of technology to areas where competitive knowledge was very important and where knowledge-transfer and its management were keys to success. Later, I was fortunate to work with many clients who needed to manage knowledge -- as we now understand it -- to evaluate and exploit knowledge, intellectual strategies, technology, and transfer of technology, skills, and expertise. These engagements occurred in many countries and for many purposes, and included automation of human expertise in knowledge-based systems of many types. In the 1970s, we were asked to help large organizations and governmental agencies develop approaches to achieve knowledge-related business objectives. These engagements ranged from business and policy analyses, strategizing, and creation of manual and automated planning systems, to development of executive information and decision support systems. During the beginning of the 1980s, our work largely focused on the application of artificial intelligence, often with motivations that were extensions of conventional systems thinking. Around 1985, it became apparent that we had been approaching application of artificial intelligence much too narrowly. We were automating small and relatively simple aspects of human reasoning in isolated business situations. A broader perspective was needed. That is, we needed to consider how to manage knowledge across the whole organization. In 1986 the thinking in my group at Arthur D. Little had progressed to the point that we went public with our concepts.**** Since then, my associates and I have had many opportunities to help clients

**** My first presentation . on knowledge management, Management of Knowledge: Perspectives of a new opportunity, was delivered to a 1986 conference sponsored by the United Nations' International Labour Office. That presentation was later published (Wiig, 1988).

Preface

xxi

organize and carry out their KM programs. It is the perspectives derived from these experiences and the corresponding research that I have attempted to share in these books. In working with different organizations in the U.S. and abroad over the last decades, we have become acutely aware of the importance of placing a central focus on knowledge. We have enjoyed opportunities to work with approaches to managing knowledge both with detailed methods and with broader strategies while at the same time seeing the challenges faced by executives to place knowledge-related opportunities, priorities, and conflicts in the context of all the other pressures they are under. Arlington, Texas, 1994

XXII


Part I Some Knowledge Management Perspectives Knowledge, the insights, understandings, and practical know-how that we all possess, is the fundamental resource that allows us to function intelligently -- as individuals and organizations. Over time, considerable knowledge is also transformed to other manifestations, such as books, technology, practices, and traditions, within all kinds organizations and in society in general. These transformations result in cumulated expertise and, when used appropriately, increased effectiveness. Knowledge is one -- if not the -- principal factor that makes personal, organizational, and societal intelligent behavior possible. I Given the importance of knowledge in virtually all aspects of daily and commercial life, two knowledge-related factors are vital for viability and success at any level: 1. Knowledge assets -- the valuable knowledge available for use or exploitation, must be nurtured, preserved, and used to the largest extent possible by both individuals and organizations. 2. Knowledge-related processes-- to create, build, compile, organize, transform, transfer, pool, apply, and safeguard knowledge, must be carefully and explicitly managed in all affected areas. In other words, in people and organizations, knowledge must be managed effectively to ensure that the basic objectives are attained to the greatest extent possible. In this context, knowledge management in organizations must be considered from three perspectives with different horizons and purposes. They require very different expertise -- although they to a large extent rely on 1 For in-depth discussion of Intelligent Organizations, see The End of Bureaucracy & the Rise of the Intelligent Organization (Pinchot & Pinchot, 1994).

2


the same insights into the organizations' knowledge status. These perspectives are: 1. Business perspective-- which focuses on why, where, and to what extent the organization must invest in, or exploit knowledge. It also covers the strategies, products and services, alliances, acquisitions, or divestments that should be considered from knowledge-related points of view. 2. Management perspective-- which focuses on determining, organizing, directing, and monitoring knowledge-related activities required to achieve the desired business strategies and objectives. 3. Hands-on operational perspective -- which focuses on applying the expertise to conduct explicit knowledge-related work and tasks. Historically, knowledge has always been managed, at least implicitly. However, effective and active knowledge management requires many new perspectives and methods and touches on most facets of the organization. We need to develop a new discipline and prepare a cadre of knowledge professionals with a blend of expertise that we have not previously seen. This is our challenge!

Chapter

1

What Kno\Vledge Managem.ent Is All about -- Som.e Perspectives What Is Knowledge Management? In its broadest sense, knowledge management (KM) is a conceptual framework that encompasses all activities and perspectives required to gaining an overview of, creating, dealing with, and benefiting from the corporation's knowledge assets and their particular role in support of the corporation's business and operations. KM pinpoints and prioritizes those areas of knowledge that require management attention by identifying salient alternatives, suggesting methods for dealing with them, and conducting activities to achieve the desired results. In a narrower and very practical sense, KM is a set of distinct and welldefined approaches and processes designed to find and manage positive and negative critical knowledge functions (CKFs) in different kinds of operations, identify new products or strategies, augment human resource management, and achieve a number of other, highly targeted objectives. Based on this definition, KM focuses on eight important areas: 1. Survey, develop, maintain, and secure the intellectual and knowledge resources of the enterprise. 2. Promote knowledge creation and innovation by everyone. 3. Determine the knowledge and expertise required to perform work tasks, organize it, make it available, "package" it (in training courses, procedures manuals, or knowledge-based systems [KBSs], for example), and distribute it to the relevant points-of-action. 4. Modify and restructure the enterprise to use knowledge most efficiently, take advantage of opportunities to exploit knowledge assets, minimize knowledge gaps and bottlenecks, and maximize the value-added knowledge content of products and services. 5. Create, govern, and monitor future and long-term knowledge-based activities and strategies-- particularly new knowledge investments-- R&D,

------------·-----------------------------------------

4


strategic alliances, acquisitions, important hiring programs, etc., based on the determined opportunities, priorities, and needs. 6. Safeguard proprietary and competitive knowledge and control use of knowledge to ascertain that only the best knowledge is used, that valuable knowledge does not atrophy, and that knowledge is not given away to competitors. 7. Provide a knowledge architecture so that the enterprise's facilities, procedures, guidelines, standards, examples, and practices facilitate and support active KM as part of the organization's practices and culture. 8. Measure performance of all knowledge assets and account for them-- at least internally-- as capitalized assets to be built, exploited, renewed, and otherwise managed as part of fulfilling the organization's mission and objectives. Four factors are particularly important in managing knowledge: (a) Efforts to create, acquire, and exploit competitively important knowledge to ensure the enterprise remains in a leadership position; (b) daily management of knowledge to operate the enterprise smartly and effectively -- intelligently (includes producing and delivering quality services and products to highest customer satisfaction and with least effort, i.e., operating as inexpensively and environmentally desirable as possible without sacrificing quality and future viability);! (c) building knowledge within the enterprise to take advantage of innovation and increased experience and pursue new opportunities; and (d) having up-to-date, explicit overview of the knowledge assets within the enterprise. The KM perspectives presented in this book provide new ways to look at knowledge as it is used in business. The book offers selected perspectives for many types of knowledge-related situations. Many of the relevant approaches and processes are discussed in the following chapters. KM should be considered as a complementary activity to valid, more traditional management perspectives and approaches. We do not think the present approaches are the only way to manage knowledge. Instead, we suggest that they provide feasible and valuable ways of dealing with many knowledge issues that previously have not been easy to address. Further, we believe it is necessary to be both flexible and vigilant in creating new methods and perspectives as our collected understanding and experience grow in this area.2 1 When we use the term "environmentally desirable," we consider the physical, economic, and

social environment, as well as the organization's internal work environment. 2 As examples, we can observe how different organizations like Chaparral Steel, Analog

What Knowledge Management Is All about- Some Perspectives

5

Management's Role Comprehensive KM touches many areas of the organization in fundamental ways -- by providing new capabilities that make possible new strategies; by changing the way people work; by requiring supportive incentives to share, use, and search for knowledge; by taking strategic advantage of knowledge-related capabilities; and in many other ways. Senior management must not only be generally supportive, they need to be convinced that these changes are highly desirable and must take active steps to make effective KM happen. And, most importantly, they must direct the business to reap benefits from these initiatives. Many students of management have emphasized the need for such involvement, particularly Peter Drucker and Tom Peters.l As a result, senior management need to be directly involved in a number of areas that are directly related to KM. They include: • Obtain corporate overview and set priorities • Create and direct corporate strategy to facilitate effective KM • Exploit knowledge-related capabilities • Allocate resources • Require department managers to manage knowledge as corporate assets • Establish policies for how to manage knowledge • Monitor how well knowledge is managed • Create incentives to share knowledge • Create incentives to use knowledge • Build infrastructures to support management of knowledge In order to "wrap their arms around" KM and what it entails, managers -and everyone else -- need to have a good and relatively simple model of what the concept covers and how it covers them. A simple model is presented in Figure 1-1. It focuses on three areas that some managers think of when they consider KM: gaining overview and understanding, distributing responsibilities to individual managers, and coordinating relevant efforts so they all pull in the same direction. Devices, and Digital Equipment Corporation have approached their knowledge management (Garvin, 1993). 1 Drucker (1993) Post-Capitalist Society and Peters (1992) Liberation Management.

-···

·---------

----------------------------------------

6


Figure 1-1. Simple Model of What KlVl Entails with a Few Examples. Senior Management's Need to Have Overview, Understand, Direct, & Make Happen

I

I Distributed Knowledge Assets Management "Everyone Needs to Make the Most of What Thev Have!"

Obtain & Maintain Knowledge-Related Overviews "What Is Going ON?"

-

What Will It Buy Us?

'--

I

Coordinate Knowledge-Related Activities & Capabilities "We All Need to Work Together!"

Characterize Knowledge Assets

-

Build Knowledge Professional Team

1---

What Are the Hot Spots?

-

Measure Value of Knowledge Assets

-

R&D Programs

f--

Which Opportunities Shall We Pursue?

-

Build Knowledge

-

Hiring Programs

1---

How Well Is It Working?

-

Share Knowledge

-

Education & Training Programs

'---

What Else Should We Do?

-

Use Knowledge Effectively

-

Develop KBS Applications

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT OCCURS ON THREE LEVELS KM functions take place on three different levels. Some take place on the organization's business level, others on the management level. Still others, which are concerned with hands-on work with the knowledge itself, take place on the level where all direct knowledge-related work occurs. Examples of functions on these three levels are listed in Figure 1-2. The functions that occur on the business level focus on the business reasons


7

for undertaking KM -- for example, using KM to create assets that can serve to create better products and services or can be exploited directly. The functions on the management level include facilitating and monitoring KM-related activities to ascertain that the business purposes are best served. Finally, on the direct knowledge-related level, functions are all the "hands-on" activities that deal with the knowledge itself. Figure 1-2. A Three-Level Perspective ofKM. BUSINESS-RELATED FUNCTIONS Plan Corporat~ Strategy Made Possible by Knowledge '- Management

f

Plan, Create, & Market New Products & Services

\.

Exploit Knowledge Assets

'-

...d

Create Joint Ventures to Facilitate Knowledge Exploitation A

\,

MANAGEMENT -RELATED FUNCTIONS /

Facilitate Knowledge Creation Acquisition Retention Transfers & Usage

/

A

'

Monitor Knowledge Management Process & Hands-On Knowledge~elated Functio~

/

Create Knowledge Management Policies & Procedures

"

' A

Provide for Knowledge Management Resources \.

' A

HANDS-ON KNOWLEDGE-RELATED FUNCTIONS Elicit & Analyze . Know led e

Five Subject Areas of Knowledge Management Five major subject areas make up the foundation of KM, forming the overall process that we wish to manage. The process starts with capturing


8


and creating "what is worth knowing" and ends when we achieve the "business value of using knowledge effectively." It is shown schematically in Figure 1-3. Figure 1·3. The Five Subject Areas of Knowledge Management. What Knowledge

IS

BUSINESS VALUE

What Is

of Using

WORTH KNOWING

Knowledge Fifectively

How Knowledge Is Arranged and Organized to Make It

Useful

The five areas include: how knowledge is acquired (learned, codified, built); what knowledge is; how knowledge is arranged and organized to make it useful; how reasoning and thinking are performed; and how knowledge is used in practice.

Examples of Knowledge-Related Problems KM deals with exploiting knowledge-related opportunities, correcting knowledge-related problems, while proactively providing the organization with capabilities to perform these functions to its best advantage. In this context, we can illustrate the realm of KM with examples of knowledge-related problems as indicated below. Most organizations frequently encounter knowledge-related problems of one kind or another. Clearly, any organization that strives to excel, and hence performs to the limits of its capabilities, will encounter bottlenecks. Knowledge-related problems is one important group that impedes the organization's ability to perform. From increased understanding of


9

knowledge and how organizations rely on it, it is possible to identify and correct many of these problems. Examples of knowledge-related problems include: • Knowledge Is Not Managed as Valuable Assets.! In most organizations, knowledge-- know-how, expertise, practices, technology-- is not managed in the same manner as other assets. Typically, knowledge is not considered explicitly as an asset, rather it is considered-- and therefore managed -- more like a commodity. The implications are that valuable knowledge is not used effectively, preserved, and it is not renewed or improved -- built -- to the organization's best advantage. -- Example: A financial firm has developed extensive expertise in identifying, negotiating, and closing mergers and acquisitions for its clients. This knowledge was concentrated in a few senior employees who keep their knowledge close to their chest. The firm rewards them handsomely for their performance, but does not require them to share their expertise with others even though these experts have built their specialized knowledge under the finn's sponsorship and considerable investments. -- Similar Situations and Symptoms: - Knowledge requirements and building are not part of long range planning - Managers are not held responsible for the knowledge within their purview -- they are not held accountable for knowledge renewal, effective use, or safe keeping, etc. - There is little support for building knowledge - Expert knowledge is unused - Employees have few continued education opportunities -Loss or improper capture of lessons-learned - Experts are reassigned or retire without transferring their expertise - Knowledge workers are only rewarded for their individual performance - There is no reward for helping others become experts or for effective team work -- Analysis Methods:2 - Knowledge surveys and audits -Critical knowledge function analysis (CKFA) - KADS-OBJECT analysis (KOA) - Task environment analysis (TEA) -Knowledge inventory systems (KIS) -- Potential Benefits from Correction of Problem: - Immediate results from better use of knowledge - A voidance of critical knowledge-related problems -Long-term survivability of enterprise

• Insufficient Knowledge at Point-of-Action. In many situations we find that knowledge workers are asked to perform tasks for which their knowledge is 1 Management of knowledge assets is discussed in Chapter 7 of Knowledge Management: The central management focus for intelligent-acting organizations (Wiig, 1994). 2 These analysis methods are discussed at length in later chapters.

10


insufficient. They may not possess the required knowledge themselves, nor may it be available through workaids such as knowledge-based systems (KBS), knowledgeable coworkers on-site, or easy-to-use reference material. -- Example: Customer service representatives are trained to handle routine situations but are required to refer to hard-to-contact outside expert groups when special situations occur-- even when they occur frequently.

-- Similar Situations and Symptoms: -Knowledge is not distributed to points-of-action - Knowledge workers are trained in routine work and are not educated to understand underlying systematic knowledge which allow them to be broad and versatile - Organization does not appear capable of delivering the desired "customer service paradigm" - Customers are dissatisfied and provide little repeat business -Work takes too long and there are unacceptable delays -Work is performed and decisions are made with insufficient knowledge resulting in errors and low quality of work products - Decisions are made in ignorance -Knowledge workers are dissatisfied - There are tense, or even bad, relations between customer/supplier functions - People refrain from taking on responsibilities -Benchmarking is nonexistent or limited

-- Analysis Methods: -Knowledge use and requirements analysis (KURA) -Critical knowledge function analysis (CKFA) - Knowledge scripting and profiling (KS&P) - Task environment analysis (TEA)

-- Potential Benefits from Correction of Problem: - Quicker completion of work -More cost-effective work performance - Improved quality of work products - Improved relations between customer/supplier functions

• Missed Learning Opportunities. We often find that valuable knowledge flows are missing by not providing feedback (for example through lessonslearned) from downstream activities to those who performed earlier work. This gap eliminates chances for knowledge workers to learn about implications of their actions. -- Example: Production planners rely on prior experiences to schedule production but do not receive evaluations or other feedback regarding inadequacies, changes, or things that work exceptionally well.

-- Similar Situations and Symptoms: - Benchmarking is nonexistent or limited -Lessons-learned are improperly captured - Lessons learned are captured -- but later lost


11

-Expert knowledge is unused - Experts are reassigned or retire without transferring their expertise - There are too many errors in work performed and repeated errors are not corrected - Overall quality of work products "could be better'' - It takes a long time to bring new workers up to speed - There is little, or no, increase in the function's effectiveness over time although there appears to be ample room for improvement - There are tense, or even bad, relations between customer/supplier functions -- Analysis Methods: -Knowledge flow analysis (KFA) - Knowledge use and requirements analysis (KURA) -Critical knowledge function analysis (CKFA) - Task environment analysis (TEA) -- Potential Benefits from Correction of Problem: - Improved quality of work products - Gradual improvement in work function effectiveness - Improved relations between customer/supplier functions

• Knowledge Transfer Is Narrow. Quite often enterprises train their workforce to perform routine functions competently, but neglect to prepare workers to deal with exceptions, or more importantly, to deliver work with outstanding quality. I This happens when the knowledge transfer to knowledge workers focuses on training rudimentary functions (for example dealing with in-house procedures, using the information system, etc.). It also happens when knowledge workers are prepared to perform a narrow set of tasks. -- Example: A software company recruits its customer support engineers from their development staff and prepares them by training them in the customer support systems and procedures. The CSEs know the features and shortcomings of the software well, but the company receives complaints about the adequacy of its customer service. On close examination, it is found that customers expect assistance, not only on how to install and operate the software, but on how to improve their internal operating practices with the help of the software. Since the CSEs do not have knowledge of customer operating practices, they are not able to help. -- Similar Situations and Symptoms: - Knowledge workers are "trained" instead of "educated." - Knowledge-related errors are too frequent -Workers are inflexible and non-versatile -Workers cannot deal with exceptions - Quality of non-routine work is below acceptable standards -- Analysis Methods: -Knowledge flow analysis (KFA) 1 A discussion of the mental models that outstanding workers possess -- and that can be taught -- is provided in Chapter 3 in Knowledge Management (Wiig, 1994).


12


- Knowledge use and requirements analysis (KURA) -Critical knowledge function analysis (CKFA) - Task environment analysis (TEA)

-- Potential Benefits from Correction of Problem: - Increased worker versatility which provides ability to tackle exception and unusual situations as well as perform broader ranges of routine work - Improved quality of non-routine work - Reduction of knowledge-related errors - Faster execution of non-routine work - Increased worker capability to aid improvement of system of production and service

• Unnecessary Division of Tasks and Decisions. For many reasons -traditions, expansions, efficiency reorganizations, power plays, etc. -- tasks and decisions may be needlessly divided between departments, specialty areas, or individual caseworkers. Needless task and decision divisions are typically propagated by division of knowledge, i.e., different entities (knowledge workers, departments, etc.) possess part of the knowledge required to perform the whole task. -- Example: A government department processed applications involving impact assessments and adherence to current regulations. Application processing was divided between separate groups for evaluation of assessment methodology, environmental assessments, economic assessments, social assessments, and regulatory conformance. Approval was divided between separate panels for impact assessment and regulatory conformance. In-depth analysis revealed extensive duplication of both evaluation work and decision-making. It also revealed that related expertise was used for many duplicated functions, expertise that easily could be possessed within the same group which then could perform most of the work previously performed by different entities.

-- Similar Situations and Symptoms: - Tossing problems "over the fence" to the next department -Unacceptably slow completion of work - Decision reversals - Excessive staffing - Many cases "fall between two chairs"

-- Analysis Methods: - KADS-OBJECT analysis (KOA) -Knowledge flow analysis (KFA) - Knowledge use and requirements analysis (KURA) -Critical knowledge function analysis (CKFA) - Knowledge scripting and profiling (KS&P)

-- Potential Benefits from Correction of Problem: - Quicker execution of work - Smaller workforce requirements - Fewer errors and higher quality results - More congruent decision-making


13

- Higher expertise built in staff - Fewer decision reversals and less internal friction

A Knowledge Management Framework The hands-on tools and approaches needed to support KM programs must be assembled into a coherent framework. This is necessary to obtain a working overview to understand what is available. It is also required to determine which methods and perspectives are appropriate for different purposes and situations. We illustrate this framework by visualizing KM as being supported by three pillars of methods and approaches, which rest on a broad foundation as shown in Figure 1-4. As discussed in Chapter 19 by van der Spek and de Hoog, this framework is not the only model that may be considered for KM within an enterprise. We must consider the known KM methodologies and approaches as preliminary, since they will be improved and modified as the field gains more experience and we develop a better understanding of applied KM. The pillars on which comprehensive KM rests consist of a number of methodologies and approaches which can be described as: L Explore the Knowledge and Its Adequacy • Survey knowledge • Categorize knowledge (i.e., describe and characterize) • Analyze knowledge and knowledge-related activities • Elicit and codify knowledge • Organize knowledge IL Establish the Value of Knowledge • Appraise and evaluate the value of knowledge • Establish the value of knowledge-related actions III. Manage Knowledge Explicitly • Synthesize knowledge-related activities • Handle, use, and control knowledge • Leverage, distribute, and automate knowledge • Implement and monitor knowledge-related activities The foundation of the KM framework reflects our general understanding of knowledge, that is, how it is created and manifested in people's minds as well as in procedures, culture and even technology; how it is used in making


14


decisions and other knowledge-related work by individuals and businesses; and how it is transferred -- that is, how we learn and how we otherwise can capture and exchange knowledge. The objective of presenting the framework is to create a working understanding of these methodologies and approaches, show how they relate to each other and the overall task of managing knowledge, and illustrate how the concepts and methods can be made useful in business.l Figure 1-4. Three Pillars of Knowledge Management.

. . . ·.

~··

····· ... ·

. ·····.·....

T

,..

;..

;..

INFLUENCES

;..

LEADS TO

>

NEXT

.,. N.,. .,.

ANALOGY SIDE REMARK EXAMPLE

L

> >

______ A____> ______ fi ____> E ------------:!Jio.

Nodes A node is a shaped line drawing such as a rectangle, square, or oval, which contains a single idea or proposition. The two important aspects of nodes are their visual appearance and the their verbal content. The shape, shading, and (sometimes) color of the node is used to signal levels of importance and to indicate the type of content they contain. In a standard sentence, key concepts are embedded within a group of words (e.g., prepositions) which are employed to orchestrate the reading process. However, with knowledge maps, the salient ideas are extracted from the body of verbiage in their essential, propositional (node - link - node) form. The visual feature of each node is a perceptual boundary which isolates the node content. The verbal feature of the nodes is the meaningful idea that is related to other nodes via the links. It is also possible to include pictorial information within nodes. The abbreviated node format obviously allows much faster reading time than typical text. Although the majority of nodes contain domain-specific

162


information, some nodes are designed to serve placekeeping, encoding, and pointing functions. Nodes of this latter type have the same function as headings, footnotes, and references in traditional text.

Labeled Links Links are the directional, arrowhead lines that connect the nodes, while labels describe or name the links. Arrowhead lines provide precision about the relationships of mapped information and offer routes through which one can read or study the information. Links are labeled by means of a standard, canonical set of symbols (e.g., P =part; L =leads to). Labels indicate how the propositions contained in nodes are related or linked to one another (see Figure 9-2).

The style of the link line itself also varies. The three categories of link styles consist of dotted lines, solid lines, and barbed lines. Dotted lines indicate analogies, examples, or comments (e.g., "In most cases"). Solid lines demonstrate a descriptive relationship between nodes such as characteristics, parts, and types. Finally, barbed lines show that a dynamic relationship is involved (such as "next," "leads to," or "influences"). The labeled link system (just as the node system) provides the relationship information which is typically conveyed in a regular text sentence. However, the information is communicated using a unique combination of visual and verbal features. The presence of canonical links indicate which ideas (nodes) are connected as well as their directional flow. The link label and the style of the links show how the ideas are related to one another. Link labels can be customized by including links that are idiosyncratic to particular knowledge domains; however, part of the elegance of the mapping system is the general applicability of a relatively small set of link labels. The simple node-link-node grammar leads to a consistent communication style across domains and knowledge "mappers" (those who make maps). Since completed maps do not contain as much "word clutter" as text, they can be more efficiently read and processed. In addition, the link types provide the basis for a series of questions (e.g., what "leads to" X), which can be used by the map maker in conducting a thorough cognitive search for all relevant information in a knowledge domain. This link- or relationship-guided search is an important aspect of the mapping system and is discussed in the section on gathering information (see "Instructions: Relationship-Guided Search").

Knowledge Maps for Knowledge Management

163

Spatial Configuration The mapping system uses spatial properties to clarify the organization of a domain. For example, "gestalt" perceptual organizing principles (see Figure 9-1) are used to indicate symmetry, similarity, continuation, parallelism, and information gaps.l Knowledge prototypes (that is, structural schemas or superstructures) are also used to organize the domain. These prototypes include descriptive hierarchies, logic and action (or strategy) chains, and concept clusters. The prototypes are emphasized by the arrangement of nodes and links (see Figure 9-3).

Figure 9-3. Spatial Configurations of Knowledge Maps.

Hierarchies

Clusters

Chains L

1 Patterson, Dansereau, & Newbern (1992b) and Rock & Palmer (1990).

------------------~---~---

164


Map Units

A map unit is similar to a book chapter or a lecture. A map unit of a knowledge domain can be presented as a single, large map or as a hierarchical set of interlocked maps (that is, hypermaps; see Figure 9-4). An overview map gives the broadest unit coverage of a domain, serving either as an introduction, table of contents, or advance organizer to a map set. Overview maps can also be used in conjunction with other media such as computer browsers, meeting agenda setters, and organizers for text documents. Hierarchical or hypermap sets refer to interlocking maps of detail information with or without an overview map. However, we recommend an organization consisting of an overview where the main topics nodes indicate what is covered in the entire map unit, followed by the detail maps in a hierarchical fashion. We will now discuss relevant research with map-like displays, followed by findings using TCU knowledge maps.

From Cognitive Science: A Look at Research Knowledge maps take advantage of the principle of "conjoint cognitive processing."! Individuals have been shown to have separate processing capacities for verbal and visual information.2 In processing displays like knowledge maps, which contain both visual and verbal information, the cognitive load is shared between two systems, which presumably increases the amount and complexity of information that can be effectively processed at one time. This notion has been experimentally verified by research on knowledge maps and their close relatives, including concept maps;3 cognitive maps;4 webs;5 and mind maps. 6 These maps have proven to be effective alternatives to text in business, technical and educational settings. However, the links in these alternative displays are typically not labeled as they are in knowledge maps. Therefore, relationships between ideas must be inferred, which may reduce processing efficiency and accuracy, especially in more complex or technical domains. 1 Kulhavey, Lee, & Caterino (1985). 2 Baddeley (1992). 3 Novak & Gowin (1984). 4 Eden (1992); Scheper & Faber (1995). 5 Cleland (1981). 6 Buzan (1974).


165

Figure 9-4. Types of Knowledge Maps.

Overview

Detail

Summary

Research with the TCU knowledge mapping system indicate that these maps: • Improve group discussion of a domain. I • Enhance representation of problems.2 1 Diekhoff, Brown, & Dansereau (1982). 2 Dees et al. (1991).

166


• Facilitate thinking and learning.l • Are more effective than standard text in acquisition of main ideas and are as effective as standard text in acquisition of details.2 • Lead to acquisition of more information in shorter time spans (i.e., 5, 10, & 20 minutes). 3 • Are superior in signaling the main ideas of a domain and make salient similarities, differences and parallel ideas in related subdomains.4 • Result in better recall performance when used as communication aids in team situations.s These results and numerous others suggest that the knowledge maps are a highly effective representational format for a knowledge mapping system.

The TCU Knowledge Mapping System The TCU knowledge mapping system for KM is described at length by Dansereau and Cross. 6 It is based on the following steps.

1. SET OBJECTIVES Specific objectives are developed regarding the types of knowledge to be gathered, from whom it will be gathered, who will gather it and in what order, where it will be stored, and who will have access to the knowledge. Subsequent steps are intended to guide the more pragmatic issues of gathering, formatting, and storing knowledge; a review of each step may also inform, a priori, decisions regarding the specification of objectives.

2. IDENTIFY RESOURCES Resources include personnel who will be working with the knowledge holders to obtain, format, store, and update the knowledge. Persons at the level of administrative assistant, perhaps those with some experience in 1 Evans & Dansereau (1991). 2 Lambiotte et al. (1989). 3 Wiegmann (1992). 4 Newbern, Dansereau, Wiegmann, & Patterson (1993). 5 Patterson, Dansereau, & Newbern (1992). 6 Dansereau & Cross (1990).

Knowledge :Maps for Knowledge Management

167

library or information science and who understand knowledge mapping, should be especially qualified to complete the requisite tasks. Since knowledge management is still new, it has no typical or established departmental home within most organizations. For example, organizations have managed knowledge from the departments of information systems, business process reengineering, and human resources. The knowledge mapping project should be housed within the department that can best carry out the mapping tasks and subsequently maintain and update the knowledge over time.

3. GATHER KNOWLEDGE Knowledge gathering may be accomplished in various ways. First it must be decided whether the experts (knowledge holders) will do any knowledge mapping themselves. For example, they may be interviewed (and perhaps taped) and notes taken, later to be converted into maps by others. Another alternative is for experts to develop maps of their own knowledge; however, this procedure is more vulnerable to jargon, "piecemeal effects," and differential mapping skills. A third alternative is recommended as optimal considering the need for (a) fidelity of the gathered knowledge; (b) time efficiency in getting the information transformed into a tangible map; and (c) the cost of the expert's and mapper's time. We suggest, therefore, that mappers and knowledge holders team up for 15 - 30 minute time periods and jointly map knowledge. A simple protocol, called Relationship Guided Search has been developed for either individual or team mapping activities. I A large flip chart with markers is very useful for this process; pieces of paper can also be used, but the larger the paper the better it is suited for the initial or rough draft maps (white/chalk boards are not recommended). Usually, the knowledge expert is asked questions by the mapper, who generates the map with the expert's collaboration. The Relationship Guided Search and link labels provide a grammar for their teamwork (see below). By the end of the first session even those experts who had not previously seen a knowledge map are typically very comfortable and participate actively in generating the maps. Thus, many knowledge holders have noted that mapping is enjoyable and instructive, partly because they are able to see their abstract ideas and knowledge manifested in a concrete form. Individuals and work teams often adopt map making for brainstorming or problem-solving 1 McCagg & Dansereau (1991).

------------------------~

168


strategies by employing the guided search as a stimulus for thinking and interacting.

Instructions: Relationship-Guided Search (RGS) The goal of the first mapping sessions on a knowledge domain is to gather all the information; in this sense, mapping is similar to "brainstorming" a rough draft (that is, editing and refinement is done later). New concepts or ideas may emerge as you go through the steps. These ideas can either be included in the current map or added to the Concept List (see "A" below). If you run out of space, just use more paper, numbering your maps as you go. Important: Be flexible in asking and answering the questions below and remember that there is no correct way of generating a knowledge map. Tailor your maps to your specific topic and purposes. You may need to include some customized links (e.g., b = based on). Keep the number of these as low as possible, remembering that the efficiency of map making is partly its reduced grammar. Next are the steps you should follow. A. Make a list of important concepts or main ideas. Save this Concept List. R Pick one concept as a starting node for the map. Put the node 1$1 m a central location on the paper. 'i 1

Database for Making Comparisons

P~J--TI~lng the Evaluation

LEGEND: ~

Can be Combined to Enhance the Benefits of Evaluation

Typeof

~Part of ~ Characteristic of

"RED FLAGS" Used by Lenders Probing for Problem Areas (Submap 3)

c

178


Figure 9-6. Submap for Objective Measurement. Objective Measurement of Business ··:::.:::

...

c

Measure of Profitability

~

Profits Compared with Sales

Asset Turnover

~

Efficiency in Using Assets in Generating Sales

What Type of Mea~ure?

:.~:=::::~

Financial Leverage

Depends on Which Analytic Focus Is Most Appropriate

§~'~'''''~''~'''~''~~'''~''~ ~ ~

~ ~

Data for Making Comparison

C

Historical

T

'

~~Plan or -]

; ·~

.,----~ . , .. , ... §

T

§ §~ §~

..,, ~

~

l ~

§

C

Budget

~~~~

-

Comparison~-J·r.

. h Other wit

~

Has Limitations: • Unavalable • Affected by Accounting Changes etc. • May Lead to Mediocrity

~ rDcc-a-ta-C-c-a-n-cBc-.e-Oc-b-ta-,.in_e_d-,.fr_o_m_:- - - - .

~.,.__

§

·-

Assets Financed by Shareholders vs. Creditors

§ ~ ~ Depends on Quality § L of Budget § . -

·---~

.

Compan1es

c

~

~

~

• Trade!lndustry Groups

• Government

• Private Compilers ~ ~~~:w:m:w:m:w:m:w:m~

.. ,, .

/P ~p-~---l ~ I Industry as ~§ ~ ~ ~~.:ww):i~

Peer Companies

,

~''~~,~~'~)~'~~,,~~~'~ Should Look at as Many Comparison Bases as Possible

Comparison with Other Companies Anually

p p '--D

Timing the Evaluation

p

..

:

I

~

.

Internal Comparisons (Historical or Budget) More Frequently

~mw.~~~~~~oow~Q


179

Figure 9-7. Submap for Subjective Measurement.

r--

p ~

Objective Measurement of Business

What Type of Measure?

c 1

Should Cover Every Activity

--

Ex

Functions

Planning Organization

Staffing

Directing

Marketing

I

Purchasing Production Sales Distribution

c Use the Following Scale to Fill in Matrix: 1. Does not perform 2. Attempts to perform, but lacks experien ce 3. Performs at reasonable level 4. Consistently performs very well 5. Outstanding

p f--j::

p ----i:==

Data for Making Comparison


c

--------------·----·----

....

Evaluation of Activities Based on Your Past Experience and/or Qualified Authorities

......

Schedule a Review on a Cycle of no More Than Six Months

~

c

~

Counseling

180


Figure 9-8. Submap for "Red Flags." "Red Flags" I

Ex,.,·'·,-

, -' -

Management Control and Communication "Flags"

,

OnePerso~

,4_~::::~ Poor Management Communications

,-,-'·Ex, __ _ __ ,, .. . .. "

.

··~,,--

~=::···----~~

Few Management Tools

. '.'''-~X-''' .... ·,b '

.

Insufficient Financial Controls

,----

iI

, . ,171 E~

T

f--t:o

Management Control and Communication "Flags"

,. _,,·'

~~ffi.~ffiffim::i®

-,--'

, .. , .

r-·---·-----·----

Ex

!.

:: · ··· · ···· · · ·· · · · · · · · ·J>i

··-·---,~~-

Late Financial Statemems Variations in Accountants' Reports

L~~~~~-!ffl '-' ·' · '- ~ Lack of InvE]etory I Records ~

T 4:o

Ex,,,,


.. --·

___ ,,,,,

I

Highly Leveraged, Thinly Capitalized

Sales Growth with no Bottom Line Increase .. ':.!.

Chapter

10

Know-ledge Use and Requirentents Analysis What Is Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis? Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis (KURA) is an extension of Task Environment Analysis (TEA) and general Basic Knowledge Analysis (BKA) described in earlier chapters. It is particularly performed to explicate knowledge use and proficiency requirements. It also explores potential areas of improvements such as education, knowledge sharing and expert networks, conventional or intelligent computer-based support systems, etc. As a result, KURA activities frequently overlap with other knowledge survey approaches. The focus of KURA is on knowledge! and its use in problem-solving, decision-making, and other K-1 activities within the target function. Since knowledge and its use are exceedingly complex matters, often only partly observable, BKA mostly provides a limited sampling of intellectual tasks and the related knowledge use and requirements. Even in relatively routine functions, over two-thirds of the K-1 activities are "hidden," therefore, requiring considerable expertise to recognize and describe. However, experience indicates that the insights and level of understanding gained through BKA yield very worthwhile results. Typical, potential short-term benefits from KURA are summarized below. Long-term benefits are, however, frequently the most important. Thus, KURA may be an early KM activity undertaken by the organization and may be the first step to introduce KM understanding and practices to support the organization's efforts to improve its capabilities and effectiveness.

1 Knowledge encompasses all acquired human intelligence assets, for which we use many labels including: Experience; Expertise; Proficiency; Competence; Skill; and Capability.

182


KURA is a relatively in-depth investigation which provides specific information in several areas, including: intellectual functions undertaken in the task environment; flows of knowledge between people or other "agents;" and other knowledge-related processes such as learning, pooling of knowledge, creation of new knowledge through development, research, or innovation. Normally, the level of detail of knowledge characterization does not go below that of "Knowledge Segments" or "Reference Cases." That is, we describe only "what the knowledge is about," not what it is. KURA is mainly based on interviews of target function knowledge workers and their managers, but observations and simulations are also used. In addition, other related materials such as professional texts, procedures manuals, and the like are consulted. The knowledge professionals are expected to keep in mind the four basic models discussed in Chapter 3 to guide them in interviews, analysis, and generation of recommendation. THE KURA PROCESS The general KURA process is depicted in Figure 10-1. It starts by obtaining relevant material and interviewing key target function personnel. Next, interview transcripts are analyzed to identify and categorize relevant knowledge elements and organize them according to topic areas and uses. Based on these detailed findings, potential recommendations are synthesized for later categorization and assembly into deliverables with recommendations From an overall for short-term actions and longer-term programs. perspective, as indicated in Table 10-1, information is sought on several knowledge-related aspects, among these, some that have not been considered relevant in traditional work-related and operations-related analyses. KNOWLEDGE ELEMENT ANALYSIS-- DETAILED FINDINGS Interview findings are summarized as isolated statements which highlight specific topics. When the knowledge holder is a "Practical Knowledge Worker" -- as people generally are -- most statements will be episodic and concrete. They mostly hold their knowledge as pragmatic knowledge. 1 If, on the other hand, the interviewee is a "Professional Practitioner" and has abstract perspectives of her/his function, many statements may provide abstract 1 The four Conceptual Knowledge Levels are presented in Chapter 3.

Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis

183

overviews. This knowledge is mostly held as systematic knowledge. However, these abstractions are at times simplified idealizations that do not correspond to reality and, therefore, need to be checked closely. Figure 10-1. Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis Process Overview. Other Materials

Interviews

~

Exam les: Reports; Or . Charts; Speci 1 Studies; ...

Knowledge Element Analysis Knowledge & Experience

Decisions

Knowledge Flows

Impediments

Cultural Themes

Taxonomies

Synthesis of Recommendations Deliverables Agreed Actions

Management Insights

Short-Term Recommendations

Long-Term Recommendations

Knowledge Status Overview

Critical Knowledge Functions

Cultural Support System

Detailed Knowledge Elements

Detailed Findings

184


Table 10-1. General Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis Topics. • Professional and expert activities and work tasks and their use of knowledge --Explicit and hidden general activities --Physical activities --including manual activities -- Intellectual activities, i.e., observable or tacit activities such as analyzing, problem-solving, creating alternatives, reasoning, recalling, etc. • Knowledge requirements for delivering high-quality work • Explicit decisions • Knowledge flows • Information flows • Explicit knowledge in terms of concepts, reference cases, etc. • Work styles and practices • Cultural factors • Roles relative to superiors, peers, subordinates • Working conditions The topic areas pursued during the interviews and later analysis pertain to knowledge-, information-, culture-, and work-related activities. Each topic area within the function under analysis has a scope which can be summarized as indicated in Table 10-2. Within each topic area, there may be subtopics as required for better insights. Entries are expanded with brief abstractions to identify their content and relation to a more general activity and are also given one-line titles to provide overview descriptions. TEA approaches are used extensively to perform KURA. To a large extent, and similar to other knowledge-related analysis work, TEA and KURA allow explicit examination of cultural factors affecting knowledge creation, use, and flows. By identifying and characterizing the factors that are affected explicitly, the cultural facets -- such as beliefs, practices, and so on -- that result in inhibitors, facilitators, and missing elements are more readily identified and desirable measures can be synthesized and accepted for implementation. Perhaps more importantly, explication of these factors facilitates opens discussions of topics that previously were considered taboo. Illustrations of the level of characterizations is provided by an example description of a knowledge intensive task (KIT) in Table 10-3. The knowledgerelated topics indicated in Table 10-2 must be described in similar detail to allow the analysis to proceed.


185

Table 10-2. Knowledge-Related Topics Explored in Task Environment Analysis in Support of Knowledge Use and Requirements Analysis (KURA).l 1. Areas of Knowledge (Experience; Expertise; Proficiency; Competence; Skill; Capability) as mentioned explicitly during interviews or "talk:-alouds." Areas mentioned implicitly as part of other topic categories may be repeated here. Areas may be summarized as: Knowledge of, with indication of Conceptual Knowledge Level where possible. 2. Knowledge-Intensive Tasks (K-1 Tasks)2 are work activities such as problem-solving which require specific knowledge or expertise to be carried out. Tasks consist of work steps and within those, activities. Tasks are summarized as: Task, Knowledge of, Information on, May Lead to Decision on, and Other Work Products. 3. Decisions are specific conclusions with resulting acts. Decisions are closely related to many K-1 Tasks such as problem-solving analysis and synthesis. Decisions are summarized as: Knowledge of, Information on, and Resulting in. 4. Knowledge Flows deal with transferring or pooling expertise or special knowledge. Some knowledge flows take place on demand, while others are regular occurrences. Many are part of consulting with others or on-the-job learning. Knowledge flows are summarized as: Knowledge Transferred, Transfer Mode, Pertains to. When pertinent, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Knowledge Flow Dimension are also indicated. 5. Information Flows concern transfer of information from one source to an individual or a function. They are summarized as: Information Transferred, Transfer Mode, and Pertains to. 6. Practices -- management, operational, and personal work practices which govern the behavior and performance of the task environment. They are summarized descriptively. 7. Key Concepts and Reference Cases include more detailed descriptions of knowledge contents-- particularly of gestalts, mental models, judgments, stories, etc. 8. Inhibitors and Facilitators are factors which constrain or promote the performance of the task -- whether physical, resource-related, traditions, etc. They are summarized descriptively . .9. Cultural Themes are the accepted beliefs, hypotheses, and abstracted traditions of the organization that influence people's acts. Unspoken policies and informal cultural behaviors are part of the themes which are summarized by: Theme Category and descriptively. 10. Task Environment Components range from knowledge workers present, individual artifacts used to perform tasks, and specific concepts (such as the concept of a "completed business analysis") used to identify physical and mental "things." They are listed. 11. Taxonomies are specific organizing relationships for the task environment. Examples include: Structure of the task environment's work objects, products and services, tasks, resources, artifacts, the organization's configuration, and so on. They are listed. 12. Task Domain Areas are often numerous, including domains such as Work Practices; Knowledge Required; Information Used; Stored, and Generated; Financial Affairs; Human Resources; and the Physical Work Place. Domains are listed.

1 There is great commonality in the topic areas pursued for KURA and many other knowledge survey approaches. 2 Many knowledge-intensive tasks (K-1 Tasks) are hidden from the observer by being carried out within the knowledge worker's mind and often within a "blink of an eye."

186


Table 10-3. Example of Knowledge-Intensive Task Summary Description Knowledge-Intensive Task #14. Task: Evaluate if the right people are available for particular positions. Function: Part of management responsibility, particularly performed during annual planning, staff reduction or expansion periods. Interview: "We must always ask if we have the right people-- but we often neglect to do that!" Knowledge of: What is required to perform quality work for the positions in question; what a "quality" job is; different approaches to assessing individuals' capabilities; which management style prevails where the individuals will operate and what that entails; key individuals involved. Information on: Skills and capabilities of candidates (as in a "Knowledge Inventory"). Maps of capabilities requirements for position. May lead to decision on: Education and training, hiring, firing, promoting, and reassigning. Business restructuring and reorganization. Business process redesign. MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR KNOWLEDGE-RELATED CHANGES Synthesizing recommendations is a creative process designed to generate potential alternative courses of action. Recommendations are developed by examining detailed findings from several perspectives, including the role and mission of the target function, priorities and objectives within the organization, and general insights provided according to the four guiding models discussed in Chapter 3. Initially, many potential alternatives may be outlined. As the process continues, however, higher-priority alternatives are defined and discussed in greater detail to result in agreed-upon recommendations. Selection and refinement of the recommendations becomes an interactive process involving the target unit's managers and knowledge workers shaping the recommendations and to set appropriate priorities. This process is also necessary to ascertain that the recommendations are "owned" by the recipients. Some of common topic areas for recommendations for KURA are similar to those for TEA and BKA, as shown in Table 8-6. EXAMPLES OF KURA DELIVERABLES The major deliverables of any knowledge analysis -- TEA, BKA, CKFA, or KURA -- are the insights and agreements of target function managers and knowledge workers on how to improve knowledge-related operations. Since


187

the objective of knowledge analysis is to create and implement improvements to realize the resulting benefits, this process is indeed important. In the case of KURA, the physical -- or tangible -- deliverables are often contained in a summary document which treats topics such as those listed in Table 10-4. This document is backed up by working memoranda with findings from the detailed analysis of the knowledge elements described below. Each significant recommendation is provided as a one-page summary to describe potential courses of action with indication of implementation options and expected benefits and negative impacts. Other topics are covered to the extent that pertinent information has been obtained. EXPECTED BENEFITS FROM PERFORMING KURA The overall benefits of KURA consist of direct business advantages thorough understanding of knowledge use and requirements within the function. Typically, the identified opportunities for improvement have not previously been evident and are made explicit by the detailed insights provided by the analysis. The explicit results also facilitate establishing priorities for changes desired. Benefits realized from this work vary considerably from organization to organization. Some benefits can be expected from identifying and implementing specific steps to strengthen the effectiveness of experts and the organization in general. These may range from new modes of collaboration and exchanging expertise, delegating selected categories of decisions to individuals with more appropriate expertise or better information access, delegating other categories to automated procedures, and changing cultural drivers by introducing new incentives. Often significant benefits also result from freeing up experts by delegating tasks to others closer to the point-of-action, providing them with better knowledge and faster overview of the situations they handle, and by automating trivial K-I tasks. Such changes allow experts to apply their talents to address broad or subtle issues and exception cases, instead of working on detailed and routine decisions and fact-based surface issues that previously have occupied much of their time. Such changes also help speed up decisions and knowledge work in general. In addition, KURA identifies specific knowledge needed to make the delegated decisions and outlines the required know ledge-transfers.

188


Table 10-4. Potential Topics Treated in KURA Summary Report. • Summary of Recommendations -- Overview of recommendations

• Recommendations for Short-Term Actions -- Summary descriptions of recommendations

• Recommendations for Long-Term Program -- Summary descriptions of recommendations

• Overview of Knowledge Situation in the Target Function -- Knowledge requirements -- Knowledge use -- Observations on decision-making -- Observations on knowledge work --Observations on knowledge flows (the four dimensions) -- Observations on cultural aspects -- Observations on information status and flows in terms of manual, automated, or implicit information -- Observations on present KM practices

• Opportunities for Knowledge-Related Improvements -- Exchange expertise through "expert networks" --Collaborate with other experts and pool expertise -- Modify decision-making process for selected decisions -- Provide decision support systems including KBS applications -- Provide information flows or system modifications -- Delegate, transfer, or elevate selected decisions --Provide the knowledge flows required to support delegated or transferred decisions --Provide knowledge flows for target function by knowledge flow dimension --Potentials for capturing knowledge such as "Lessons-Learned" and codification of expert knowledge (for sharing, before experts retire, etc.) -- Potentials for information-related solutions such as information overloads and crucial information needs -- Cultural drivers that may be candidates for change by being modified, encouraged, or discouraged -- Potentials for new incentives

Specific opportunities may also be identified for experts and other knowledge workers to improve their personal knowledge or gain access to knowledge that already has been codified or is available from others. Such opportunities can range from tailored seminars by outside experts, codifying tacit and explicit knowledge to make it available, and capturing "lessonslearned" and documenting these experiences in widely shared databases or libraries.


189

KURA and other knowledge analyses may also identify significant information overloads and crucial information needs. At times, support of central K-I tasks and decisions may lead to changes in existing DSSs and other information systems to: 1. Organize the existing information differently to provide better overview and identify important patterns to aid decision-making and analysis 2. Provide new analytical capabilities to support decision-making and a variety ofK-I tasks 3. Make available additional information which people need in order to exercise more of their relevant knowledge 4. Change user interfaces to support the experts' cognitive styles and "think flows, Many experts feel inadequate and insecure since they cannot have top proficiency in all the knowledge areas they wish to command to execute their responsibilities. As a result of KURA, however, they gain better understanding of their own strengths and can accept that their decisions will be better-- while improving their own personal position-- when they pool their knowledge with other sources or by delegating selected decisions to others. When, in other words, they engage in team work. EXAMPLES OF DETAILED KURA FINDINGS (Excerpts from a Working Memorandum on Knowledge Element Analysis) 1. Knowledge and Experience Example of Knowledge Held or Episodes That Describe Knowledge Used The purpose of these statements is to illustrate (often implicitly) the type of knowledge required. Some statements may be repeated under other headings. 7. Structuring and positioning capital requests and projects. Interview Statement: "One of the reasons we had a hard time getting approval for projects is because they never got the returns people projected. So we spent a lot of time changing our thinking to: 'Here are the bases for our projections. Here is what people used historically to make their projections. Here is why we believe it is conservative and why we will achieve our goals.' I want the new projects to be models for how a project should be structured, shared, and run." Knowledge of: What is required to plan and execute successful projects. How to position capital requests. Lessons-learned from past errors. The value systems and strategies of corporate decision-makers. Apparent Conceptual Knowledge Level: Goals for this knowledge area is held as Level 1 (Idealistic knowledge); most is held as Level 2 (Systematic knowledge); with the aim to transfer knowledge to others for them to hold as Level3 (Pragmatic knowledge).

190


2. Knowledge-Intensive Activities Episodic Example of Use of Knowledge to Perform Activities

14. Evaluate if the right people are available for particular positions. Function: Part of management responsibility, particularly performed during annual planning, staff reduction or expansion periods. Interview Statement: "We must always ask if we really have the right people-- but we often neglect to do that!" Knowledge of: What is required to do a quality job for the positions in question. What a "quality" job is. Different approaches to assessing capabilities of individuals. Which management style the individuals will operate within and what that entails. The key individuals involved. Information on: Skills and capabilities of the people (estimates and assessments as in a "Skills Inventory"). Map of capability requirements for position. May lead to decision on: Hiring, firing, promotions, reassigning. Business restructuring and reorganization. Function re-engineering. 3. Decisionsl Episodes of Decision-Making I. Strategic Decisions -- Knowledge of external environment, competition, comparatives, consequences of options; probabilities-- e.g., "fund R&D@ 15%." II. Policy Decisions -- potential options, comparative analysis, probability of competitors' policies, benchmarking, e.g., "financial policy to incur debt now to fuel R&D."

19. Decision to: Implement career planning. "We really want to set up career tracks for each person now that we have performance and profitability analyses." Knowledge of: Which careers are valuable to the corporation -- and should be staffed with exceptionally capable people. What is required for each position and career. Methods for personnel assessment and career and succession planning. Interpretation of performance and profitability analyses for personal contributions. Information on: Personnel records including performance information. Existing career and succession plans. Profitability and performance analyses -- current and historic -with focus on individuals' contributions. III. High-Risk Decisions-- Knowledge of pros & cons, alignment with decisions made in 1 & 2 above; consequences, e.g., "put a multimillion $ plant in a certain location vs. 1 On Good Decisions: Quality decisions are creative and do not overlook important options and important implications. They require knowledge and pertinent information and must be made available where and when needed. Decisions have no value unless implemented. Extensive discussion of knowledge required for different kinds of decision-making and problem-solving is provided in Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993). On Knowledge for Decisions: The knowledge needed to make quality decisions includes: a. What "you need to be good at" to make the decisions - methods, approaches, understanding of underlying characteristics, knowledge of similar situations, etc. b. What "you have to know" to avoid unnecessary analysis and to be able to make quick decisions -- methodologies, judgments, applicable reference cases, etc. c. What "you need to know" to substitute for missing or inadequate information -- your judgments and expectations, etc.


191

somewhere else."

31. Decision to: Make decisions on pricing and bidding strategy for selected, large accounts. "I make a few decisions on large accounts on whether or not we are going to pursue them and at what pricing." Knowledge of: Pricing. Game theory. Market and competitive behavior. Corporate profitability strategy and objectives. Information on: Profitability contributions of products in each region and market. Market intelligence. IV. Exception Decisions -- Relative fast decisions made on the basis of judgment. Knowledge of all facts of the situation and thinking of lower levels of management, e.g., a certain action plan vis avis a competitive account. V. Select and Monitor Decisions -- access to decisions by others for monitoring. VI. Red Flag Decisions -- Quick mid-course correction decisions when things have gone off kilter. 4. Knowledge Flows Episodic Knowledge Flows •• Current Example of empowering the organization -- with sufficient knowledge to delegate decisions.

24. Educating the sales staff to make better pricing decisions and profitability analyses to support delegation of authority. "As a group we are upgrading the quality of the organization. We are getting real professional people out there that are not just salespeople in the classical sense. We ask them also to be business managers and understand the profitability of their territory. They have to make more decisions." Now when they come back, they should be able to say: "I want to quote this much and here is the profitability analysis to support it." Knowledge Transferred: Judgments on profitability analyses and pricing decisions. Transfer Mode: From VP to sales staff by discussions, presentations, and similar workrelated interactions. Learning-on-the-job. Hiring knowledgeable people. Pertains to: Improved ability to perform job as greater authority is delegated downwards. Improved performance. 5. Information Flows 23. Periodic information-gathering on undesirable activity trends. "I wouldn't go back to them and ask questions about why didn't they do something -'why didn't you do that?' If I wanted to do that, I would periodically go out into the region and talk to the manager about it. You know, if I saw a trend. But I used as a mechanism to drop notes back to the people on, you know 'Nice Piece of Work'." Information Transferred: Factual and expanded information of "what actually happened." Knowledge Transferred: Perspectives on how to look at the situation. Transfer Mode: Verbally. Pertains to: Identifying undesirable trends in order to stop them. 34. Reinforcing communications to subordinates. "I wouldn't go back to them and ask questions about why didn't they do something --

192


'why didn't you do that?' If I wanted to do that, I would periodically go out into the region and talk to the manager about it. You know, if I saw a trend. But I used as a mechanism to drop notes back to the people on, you know 'Nice Piece of Work'." Information Transferred: Brief accolades. Knowledge Transferred: None. Transfer Mode: Written note. Pertains to: Reinforcing positive behavior.

51. Formalized profitability analyses --from each region and area. " ... can find out that the people who actually are bringing in the business are getting right kind of support. ... What we really want to do now is to -- now that we have the profitability analysis-- and really want to set up a track on career basis. Someone's performance in their territory. Because we have historically had a number of people out there that have been great in their day at maintaining business -- or good at maintaining business. But not very good at acquiring business. And we cannot afford that." Information Transferred: Achieved profitability. Knowledge Transferred: None. Transfer Mode: Formal reports. Pertains to: Monitoring of individual contributions and performance.

6. Impediments 5. Tradition to go all out to prevent the loss of a customer -- even when very unprofitable. "There has been lots of rationality that we never lose a piece of business."

7. Cultural Themes Cultural themes are accepted beliefs, hypotheses, and abstracted traditions of the organization which influence people's acts. Unspoken policies and informal cultural behaviors are part of these themes. Example: The working hypothesis that "The customer is always right!" and the situations where this theme governs the company's actions.

Positive Themes 2. Our management style permits open discussion on criteria for our business. "On management style: We had an ongoing discussion of what the criteria were. How are we going to accomplish it. What kind of information do we have. How credible was the information. A whole series of things like that. It was more of an ongoing discussion."

8. Taxonomies Taxonomies are specific organizing relationships which are accepted by the organization. The organization's structure, and listing of its products and services are examples of taxonomies:

• Aspects of company policy and the conditions under which they apply, the approvals that are required to implement some of them, exception conditions, etc. • Organization charts for the function, adjacent, and other related or supporting departments.


193

9. Task Environment Components Components range from the knowledge workers present, the individual artifacts they use to perform their tasks, and specific concepts (such as a "completed business analysis") that are used to identify physical and mental "things." Examples of task environment components include:

• A valuable customer, afactory recall, a customer complaint-- these components, in turn, relate to other components in many ways. • Lists of resources that support the function, grouped by nature or by tasks (grouping may be in the form of handbooks and reference documents.

10. Domain Areas Domains range from "Work Practices," "Knowledge Required," "Information Used, Stored, and Generated," "Financial Affairs," "Human Resources," to "Physical Work Place." Examples include:

• Customer service area: company policy, company products, profitability of particular operations, customer operating practices, customer business, work environment, coworkers, work practices, etc.

194


Chapter

11

Kno-wledge Scripting and Profiling A Multi-Perspective View1 Knowledge scripting and profiling (KS&P) brings together several of the approaches discussed in earlier chapters to create three distinct but closely interrelated deliverables, each with important areas of utility. These major deliverables are: • Scripts that outline sequence and relations of knowledge-intensive (K-1) steps and the more detailed activities within the work steps. The scripts are generic and may vary considerably for the different routine and exception cases that are performed within the target function, often by the same individual. The sequence of steps may vary and only a subset of steps may be performed for particular cases and separate scripts may be developed for each major task. • Concept hierarchies, associated concept nets, or knowledge maps which reflect the dominant knowledge areas and perspectives that competent knowledge workers need to command to deliver quality work. Facts, judgments, and methods lie behind these concepts and together they define the body of knowledge that is required to perform the steps and activities that build up the tasks executed within the business function. • Knowledge profiles, skill profiles, and personal characteristics profiles that define subjective assessments of the knowledge, skills, and personal traits required for the different work-roles within the function. The knowledge profiles reflect "professional" knowledge needed, often in terms of idealistic, systematic, and pragmatic knowledge. This knowledge is normally obtained through education. Skill profiles reflect the "clerical" knowledge that mostly is possessed as automatic and pragmatic knowledge by the knowledge workers. This knowledge is normally obtained through training. Personal characteristics profiles reflect required inherent traits. In addition to these three primary deliverables, KS&P provides other, more detailed deliverables including description of major components: 1 This topic is also discussed in Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993).

196


• • • • •

K-1 steps in each script. Activities within each K-I step. Knowledge segments or reference casesl required for each K-I step. Information items required for each K-I step. Goals, strategies, and methodologies that relate to each step.

Introducing Knowledge Scripting and Profiling KS&P of a particular function is performed to make explicit the K-I work performed in the function and to describe the particular knowledge, skills, and personal characteristics required to deliver routine work as well as deal competently with exceptions. In particular, KS&P is used to identify the requirements for different work-roles in the function. We may also use the approach to identify available knowledge and skills, particularly for the purposes of exploring opportunities for making better knowledge available or pooling resources through teaming, networking, and collaboration or to provide support systems of some kind. KS&P is a powerful complement to business process reengineering and other management initiatives which lead to organizational restructuring and changes in allocation of responsibilities. In those cases, the approach provides methods for managing and maximizing the effective use of expertise and other human characteristics. It is generally undertaken to improve and change the target function. Consequently, the analysis must consider not only how the function works at present, but also what the plans are for its future role and setting. The KS&P methodology is an extension of, and builds upon, several methodological aspects of TEA, VP A, BKA, CFKA, KF A, KURA, and knowledge profiling for work-role evaluation. To provide material for its analysis and synthesis. it obtains inputs from observations, interviews, simulations, knowledge mapping, limited knowledge elicitations, and aspects of ethnographic methods. As a result, KPs should be familiar with those approaches before undertaking KS&P. Traditionally, analysis in support of operation rationalization has focused on observable work function tasks, work flow, information flow, organizational 1 Knowledge is categorized in increasing detail as: Knowledge Domain, Region, Section, Segment or Reference Case, Element, Fragment, and Atom.

Knowledge Scripting and Profiling

197

structure, loci of responsibility and authority, economics, and cultural factors. The mental activities and less observable knowledge-related tasks which knowledge workers perform were not considered -- mostly because of inadequate awareness and methodologies to deal with these factors. Nor were the expertise, skill, and personal characteristics considered. It is the role of KS&P to provide methods to deal with these factors. KS&P is built upon standard knowledge analysis approaches. It starts by working with managers and knowledge workers who are directly involved to determine the nature of the function, issues, scope of investigation, and the like, to set the stage before detailed work proceeds. The detailed work focuses on the knowledge workers in the function through interviews, observations while at work, and often, simulations. It focuses on managers' perspectives of present and future role of the function and on the nature of work and the capabilities required to perform it. Often it is necessary to interview and observe knowledge workers and managers in upstream, downstream, and adjacent functions, that is, the functions that supply the target function with work products, use its work products, or exchange (provide or receive) consultation or collaboration resources. The analysis is performed to identify "standard" deliverables including tasks, scripts, K-I steps, activities, relevant knowledge segments, information items, goals, strategies, work methodologies, required knowledge, skills, personal characteristics, and cultural and environmental factors. The complete information gathering can almost never be performed in one pass. Frequently, a second or even a third pass is required to refine the characteristics to the detail and specificity desired. KS&P results have many uses which fall into different categories. Common uses include: • Creation of educational programs for knowledge workers to provide them with a desirable complement of capabilities needed to deliver high-quality work. • Development of automated support systems such as Decision Support Systems (DSS) or "Electronic Performance Support Systems" (EPSS). • Creation of "expert networks" to make expertise available from other areas. • Redesign of business processes, such as changing allocation of tasks between functions. • Assessment of personnel and development of career plans. Before we can proceed with scripting and profiling, we need to identify some aspects of proficiency and how to build knowledge profiles.

198


Proficiency Levels and Expertise1 When considering the expertise that people have in a knowledge area, we need ways to express what they know. Similarly, if an activity needs to be performed, we need to identify and describe the level of knowledge required to perform it with a quality outcome. In many situations, we need to categorize and express the levels of knowledge in a general way within specific knowledge areas without going into great detail. We often use as a high-level knowledge measure the level of proficiency in a particular knowledge area such as a section or segment. We use this measure in several ways. For example, we can use it to: • Express how proficient a person, or a group of people, is in an area • Specify the proficiency required to perform quality work in a task • Describe the extent and depth of knowledge in a knowledge base • Characterize the level of performance of a knowledge-based system • Identify and illustrate knowledge gaps in a business function • Show unused expertise that may provide new opportunities We introduced the knowledge proficiency dimension in Table 2-4 as seven proficiency levels ranging from beginner to grandmaster. We used labels that have meanings in general use to make them intuitively understandable and useful. They are explained further in Table 11-1. In practice, we may never find people who are grandmasters. However, we frequently find experts, and most larger organizations have many masters, although the majority of them can only claim mastery in narrow knowledge areas. The scale indicated in Table 11-1 may not always be appropriate.2 Many 1 This section is adapted from Knowledge Management Foundations, Wiig (1993).

2 Several proficiency categorization systems are used. Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1986) in Mind over Machine propose five states: 1. Novice; 2. Advanced Beginner; 3. Competence; 4. Proficiency; and 5. Expertise. Bohn & Jaikumar (1986) propose eight stages of knowledge about technical processes: 1. Recognition of prototypes; 2. Recognition of attributes within prototypes; 3. Discrimination among attributes; 4. Measurement of attributes; 5. Local control of attributes; 6. Recognition and discrimination of contingencies in control; 7. Control of contingencies; and 8. Complete procedural knowledge of control of contingencies. Lange (1993) in his work with human resource management uses five levels: 1. Innocence; 2. Awareness; 3. Understanding; 4. Competence; and 5. Excellence. For general purposes, we find it desirable to operate with the seven levels listed in Table 5-l to appropriately separate proficiencies in people who work on real-life tasks. We also use a five-level "BACPE" scale consisting of: 1. Beginner; 2. Advanced Beginner; 3. Competent Performer; 4. Proficient Performer; and 5. Expert. We omit the two last categories (Master and Grandmaster) when they do not apply.


199

situations and organizations may require different ways of defining proficiency levels. Several proficiency or expertise level categorizations have been proposed. On some occasions we have used systems consisting of five proficiency levels but field experiences indicate that the seven-level scale discriminates better and allows us to distinguish between knowledge requirements and performance levels of different individuals.

Table 11-1. Seven Levels of Proficiency. I B A C

P

E

M

G

Ignorant. Totally Unaware. Does not know of the existence of the area. Beginner. Vaguely aware, innocent with little and arbitrary understanding. Lacks experience and competence ("amateurish".) Advanced Beginner. Aware, informed but relatively incompetent in broad areas. Cannot work alone but begins to develop skills in narrow areas ("novice".) Competent Performer. Beginning to develop an understanding while being narrowly skilled. Trusted to perform certain tasks alone. Learning by practical experience under skilled supervision ("apprentice".) Proficient Performer. Competent and broadly skilled with a few areas of deeper knowledge. A team leader. A worker who has learned a trade and works for another person. An experienced and reliable worker or performer, especially as distinguished from one who is brilliant or colorful ("journeyman".) Expert. Highly proficient in a particular area and generally knowledgeable. Provides leadership and crucial expert insights. One with the special skill or knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject. Master. Highly expert in many areas and broadly knowledgeable. Is normally the principal and leading force in the knowledge area both within and outside the organization. A revered leader, a qualified teacher of both proficient performers and experts, a performer of consummate skill. Grandmaster. World-class expert who is both knowledgeable and wise in all areas of the domain and enjoys wide recognition. Very few exist.

When we want to describe proficiency in a broad knowledge domain, it needs to be divided into smaller areas, such as knowledge regions, sections, or even segments that are adjacent to each other to the largest extent possible. The break-down provides greater specificity and clearer categorization. In Table 11-2 we show two examples ofhow this is done. One example is from the process industry where the domain has been divided into eight knowledge areas, the other from the financial service industry with ten knowledge areas. These examples represent expert opinions of professionals from the two organizations on how they specify knowledge areas in these expertise domains and divide them into roughly equal knowledge areas. The knowledge areas are not listed in any order of priority but they represent areas of similar

200


importance and extent. Further, they are listed in such an order that adjacent professional areas are shown next to each other when presented in a polar diagram as discussed below. However, beginning practitioners find that it is not easy to identify and label different expertise categories. There are two reasons for this: (a) It may require unusual broad overview to establish all knowledge areas that are relevant to a particular work function, and (b) It is difficult to cluster smaller knowledge areas into larger groupings that are independent and of equal importance. Table 11-2. Dividing Knowledge Domains into Smaller Knowledge Areas. Process Operations Expertise

Area

Portfolio Management Expertise

Operating the Unit Process Operating Procedures Plant Equipment and Layout Diagnostic Methods Process Chemistry Quality and Customer Requirements Company Policy and Management Process and Company Economics

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Trading Strategy Investment Strategy Portfolio Theory Portfolio Selection Securities Selection Intelligence Analysis Economic Forecasting Technical Analysis Company Analysis Industry and Competitive Analysis

9 10

Knowledge Profiles A very useful representation of high-level knowledge is the knowledge profile. We can plot the proficiency levels for a knowledge domain in a polar diagram where the individual axes represent separate knowledge areas such as those in Table 11-2.1 In this way, we obtain a highly representative description of what a person knows or what kind of expertise is required to do a task right. Figure 11-1 provides an example of knowledge profiles for two typical chemical plant professionals, one is an expert operator while the other is a process engineer. 1 Polar diagram plots allow reliable and quick recognition of strengths and weaknesses. As a result, they provide a superior overview representation compared with tables or vertical and horizontal bar charts. Our visual system discriminates the angular positions of polar representation much better than the relative position in a linear progression of bars.


201

Figure 11-1. Examples of Knowledge Profiles from the Process fudustry.

Expertise in

Expertise in

Process Chemistry

Diagnostic Methods

G

- - - Expert Plant Operator •••••• , Process Engineer

In this example, the two persons' knowledge profiles are shown for the knowledge segments that were listed in Table 11-2 as required for process operations expertise. We often show the proficiencies of people with different backgrounds and areas of expertise in the same graph when they collaborate on, or have different responsibilities for, a particular task. The plant operator has expert proficiency in the areas of operating procedures, operating the process, and plant equipment and layout. She is less of an expert in other areas and does not know process chemistry well (she is between an advanced beginner and a competent performer in that area). The process engineer knows the plant less well than the operator, but has considerable expertise in process chemistry, quality, customer requirements, and diagnostic methods. Neither has extensive knowledge of company policy,

--·----·----·----~~-

202


management practices, or process and company economics, although the engineer knows more in those areas than the operator. The knowledge profiles of the two process company employees indicate that their knowledge is sufficient for performing their designated tasks. However, they may not know enough to transfer their knowledge to other tasks beyond their present responsibilities. The knowledge profile in Figure 11-1 provides a good overview of what a person knows. This type of profile is also used to portray the knowledge required to perform a quality job for a particular position and to indicate areas of shortfalls or unused knowledge. An example of these uses is shown in Figure 11-2 for the portfolio manager position in Table 11-2. Sometimes we need to analyze and portray what a person knows in greater detail than can be supported with the simple diagram in the preceding figures. We can expand each knowledge area to portray a number of additional knowledge axes. Each major knowledge area is expanded into six to twelve sub-areas, each of which can be analyzed and estimated to illustrate job requirements, a person's proficiency profile, available expertise in a team, or other knowledge-level assessments of interest. The proficiency requirements for the portfolio manager position are indicated with a dotted line for the ten areas of expertise, while the actual proficiency for a particular portfolio manager is shown with a solid line. The person shown here demonstrates many strong points relative to the job requirements. She is an old-timer who previously was a trader. Earlier, she was an analyst but is relatively new as a portfolio manager. While she is an expert in areas related to her previous jobs, she is not yet very good at most of the portfolio-management tasks. Hence, she performs some jobs excellently, but makes errors in other cases and still needs significant assistance. There is room for assisting this portfolio manager with additional knowledge. Assistance comes in the form of pooling expertise from experts in the five areas in which she is deficient. It also comes from an easy-to-use rule book. Under other circumstances, the assistance could come from a knowledge-based system (expert system or other computer-based workaids), which the manager could consult on issues about which she has questions. If such a knowledge-based system were an active reasoning system, it could automatically review the decisions she makes, suggest alternatives, and point to issues that may be relevant. This is not a utopian dream. At present, most large financial companies have systems of this kind in full operation as part of their decision support system workstations. Many are implemented as rule-


203

based or case-based reasoning KBS applications. Figure 11-2. Knowledge Profile Used to Describe Expertise Requirements for a Portfolio Manager In an Investment Firm. Proficiency in

Proficiency in

Portfolio Theory

Intelligence Analysis

A Knowledge Scripting and Profiling Example 1 In the customer service environment of a consumer product manufacturing and mail order retail firm, the central task is represented by the script for routine interactions. This task takes place when customer 1 This example is adapted from Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993) and was partly motivated by work performed by Sue Stafford and Dorothy Yu.

204


service representatives (CSR) answer incoming calls from customers. The script consists of eight K-I steps as illustrated in Figure 11-3. Figure 11-3. Script for Routine Customer Interaction. Verify Caller

Process Transaction

The routine customer interaction tasks deal with queries or requests for particular transactions. Nonroutine and unusual tasks, on the other hand, take on many forms and may require special expertise to identify and handle. Although they are nonroutine, these tasks still are considered part of the regular job requirements. Each K-I step consists of several Observable and Hidden K-I activities. For example, the step "Verify Caller" illustrated in Figure 11-4, consists of six K-I activities. Note that only two are Observable while the remaining four are Hidden. The K-I activities are: • Ask open questions to verify information given-- Observable • Think of several approaches to verify caller-- Hidden • Listen for "red flags" --Hidden • Listen for caller emotions -- Hidden • Determine caller attitude and mindset -- Hidden • Type information and conduct conversation -- Observable


205

It cannot be assumed that the activities take place in a certain sequence as indicated implicitly in Figure 11-4. Any activity can be the "entry point" (the first activity performed) followed by other activities in almost any order. Figure 11-4. Knowledge-Intensive Step to ''Verify Caller." A Ask open questions to verify information given

F

B Think of several approaches to verify caller

Type information and conduct conversation

c

E Determine caller attitude and mindset

Listen for "red flag" messages and problems

D Listen for caller emotions

An even more complex K-I step is "Form picture of caller" which consists of a number of K-I activities. Again, most of these activities are hidden and involve complex K-I activities to establish an abstract mental picture -- a characterization of which symbolic concept state best describes the customer (see the next section). The complexity and invisibility of this activity is indicated by the simplified concept hierarchy shown in Figure 11-4 for the customer service situation. These concept hierarchies may be obtained by the use of the KMap approach. The important knowledge areas, skills, and personal characteristics for our example are indicated in Table 11-3. As shown, each of the three dimensions is made up of 12 categories. Not all categories pertain to every K-I step. In the aggregate, however, all 36 categories are required for proficient CSRs, to varying degrees. We arranged the categories by conceptual level for knowledge and by type for skill areas and personal characteristics. (Note that all the skill areas correspond to the automatic conceptual knowledge level.) When the desired profiles for all important K-I steps have been identified, it is possible to determine the composite profile for the overall task the CSR (the example knowledge worker) needs to handle. The number of capability characteristics is high and requires an approach that leads to easy understanding. We use knowledge profiles to present explicit and easy-toperceive overviews of the specific capabilities required for the different K-I

----------------------

200


steps and for the overall customer service task illustrated in Figure 11-6. We show separate polar diagrams for the three dimensions of knowledge, skills, and personal characteristics. In addition, we may group them by conceptual level for knowledge and by types for skill areas and personal characteristics. In Figure 11-6 these groupings are indicated for better overview.

Figure 11-5. Concept Hierarchy for Determining Customer Situation. Mental Picture of Customer's Situation

I

I

Recent Communications

Customer's Potential Perception of Our Company

H r----1

---i

Sales History

r----1

11

Word of Mouth

II

Earlier Contacts

-1 Face-to-Face Interactions --

II Jl

H

What Is Wanted Now? DoWeMeet Expectations?

Previous Relations with Our Company

I

II l

& Steady I ri Long Relationship?

~

Any Biased Perceptions

-

~

History of Returns Account Activity

I

I

Customer as an Individual

Reasons for Using Our Products

H H

Age

II Occupation & Hobbies

H Ac~~;~t II H

l

Hist

Family I Children

Account Balance

City vs. Small Town

--

1

II

---i

Life-Cycle Costs & Price

II

,---1

Compatibility

II

Reliability

I

II

I

Quality

II~

• Gauge knowledge level of customer. • Figure out product use pattern. • What products and services make sense for this customer? • Determine (by making assumptions) customer intent.

SOME COMMENTS ON KNOWLEDGE REQUIRED FORK-I ACTNITIES As indicated in the above knowledge characterizations, there is an initial tendency to describe the required knowledge in terms of its most factual and visible (or, at times, action-oriented) components. There is also a bias to focus on the directly observable skills while ignoring hidden activities. However, such an approach does not meet the requirements for deeper conceptual, experiential (judgmental), and methodological knowledge needed to achieve the desired quality outcomes. As a result, K-I activities may be misrepresented.


2fJ7

Table 11-3. Knowledge, Skill Areas, and Personal Characteristics of Importance. Knowledge Areas Skill Areas Personal Characteristics Idealistic Mental Functions Hidden messages by callers Quick thinker Analogies Synthesize information Sales aspects Shift and focus on new topic Systematic Prioritize work Product marketing world Reception Functions Product application methods Listening Product life cycles Quick learner Customer service Production Functions Pragmatic Verbal communication Company business Written communication Product knowledge Team participation Product alternatives Follow-through Automatic Functions Product policies Customer information Telephone use Automatic Keyboard and computer

Action Orientation Extrovert Inquisitive Asks questions Self-Reliance Confident Positive self-image Approach Attitudes Positive, pleasant, sincere Realistic Adaptive Patient Emphatic Unemotional Preferences Likes phones

In this example, all three dimensions were specified with 12 categories. The number of categories may vary from as few as six to as many as 15. If the number of "equally dominant" categories appears to be higher, consolidating some or otherwise reducing the number should be considered. To observe the work process and the knowledge required, a simulation may be performed as described earlier. This involves an advanced beginner processing difficult cases with the assistance of an expert who is situated on the other side of a partition and hence cannot observe the case content, computer workstations, or the beginner. The whole process is videotaped to capture dialog, introspections, problems, and the detailed activities for further analysis. This type of simulation is performed to make visible and explicit as many of the hidden K-I tasks as possible. The problem to be overcome here is that experts automate highly familiar knowledge and, as a result, often perform very elaborate and complex activities within fractions of a second. Some of these activities may require an advanced beginner -- or even a competent performer -- several minutes or longer to complete. During analysis and observations (with guidance from a KP), it often becomes clear to all participants -- frequently for the first time -- how complex

200


the activities are and how much and deep knowledge is required to perform the tasks competently. Figure 11-6. Profile for Knowledge, Skills, and Personal Characteristics for the Customer Service Representative's Knowledge-Intensive Scripts. Mental Functior:

Idealistic Knowle

""' "~ r'::----,.r::':''''''''/ """ '0

r
."' "' ~

Knowledge I- Ignorant B- Beginner A - Advanced Beginner C - Competent Performer P - Proficient Performer E- Expert

I- Ignorant B- Begirmer A - Advanced Beginner C- Competent Performer P- Proficient Performer E- Expert

-

Personal Characteristics I- Inept B- Barely S- Somewhat N -Normally V- Very E- Extremely Approach Attitud•

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS PROFILES Detailed discussions are normally conducted among the target function leaders and the KPs to identify the specific knowledge areas, skill areas, and personal characteristics required to perform quality work in the function.

---------------------------


209

These discussions are usually based upon what is learned while developing the K-I scripts, steps, and activities and focus on what is required to deliver specific -- and well defined -- pieces of work. Initially, the discussions may focus on general knowledge required. As they progress, however, considerable attention is placed on specific knowledge needed to perform certain K-I tasks (processing different kinds of cases, forming "picture of client," dealing with client intents and directly with identified client archetypes). This leads to an evaluation of the knowledge required by seasoned caseworkers as well as entrants and makes it possible for the team to specify the proficiency desired. After the knowledge profiles are completed, the discussion may proceed to deal with skills (often automated and routine knowledge), with a final focus on personal characteristics.

A PERSPECTIVE OF KNOWLEDGE-INTENSIVE SCRIPTS AND PROFILES In performing KS&P work, a particular model needs to be known, or assumed, for the desired "service paradigm" for the target function and how the service paradigm supports the organization's overall direction and intents. As discussed in Chapter 3, the service paradigm directly influences the nature of K-I activities that need to be performed and, therefore, shapes the resulting knowledge requirement profiles. Since the KM work that we usually perform addresses changes to be made -- that will take effect in the future, we typically need to consider "tomorrow's service paradigm" since that must be satisfied with the changed capabilities. The K-I scripts and profiles often are developed to identify proficiencies required for several different work-roles such as the minimum capabilities of entry-level caseworkers and ideal proficiencies for highly competent knowledge workers. KNOWLEDGE PROFILES PROVIDE INSIGHT INTO NEEDED EDUCATION Another aspect that often needs to be addressed is the extent and nature of education or training required to bring entrants up to the desired proficiency level. This task may not be appropriately performed until the knowledge and skill profiles for proficient caseworkers are established. The time required to bring entrants up to speed must also be considered, since it may require months or years for an entrant to become proficient, and considerable time after that before s/he reaches the level of "ideal caseworker." To provide quality service according to the reigning service paradigm, it is often found that the

210


required knowledge must be possessed as readily available pragmatic and automatic knowledge. Typically, it is more extensive and may be quite different from the previous background of new people brought into the function

Chapter

12

Kno~ledge Flo~s Analyzing Knowledge Flows When analyzing the flows of knowledge in operations which appear to be well managed and properly organized, it nevertheless is frequently discovered that many problems hinder knowledge from flowing properly, timely, and to the right areas. As a result, good learning opportunities are missed, valuable knowledge is lost after it has been laboriously obtained and found practical use by individuals and departments, or crucial knowledge is forgotten and disappears after it has been documented for later use in rare, but difficult situations. Similarly, important knowledge within or outside the organization may be overlooked when improvements are sought and changes made. For many reasons, people may not consult the best knowledge sources when making important decisions. Undesirable conditions like these, as well as other unrecognized opportunities, are uncovered by properly conducted knowledge flow analyses. At the same time as it uncovers problems such as these, knowledge flow analysis (KFA) identifies and makes it possible to synthesize important opportunities for improving the knowledge flows. Accordingly, such analysis methods can provide new insights into how to perform work tasks better, "work smarter," improve work functions, and improve or renew products and services or create new ones. A major challenge in KFA is to identify and characterize all the relevant sources of new knowledge. "Innovation is everywhere, the problem is learning from it."l It is both impractical and undesirable to identify every innovation in an organization, particularly since people at all levels are full of ideas and continually invent new ways to improve their work. Many of these innovations are personal and may not apply to others. Nevertheless, valuable insights and many opportunities for improving knowledge flows are provided by identifying 1 Brown, J. S. (1991).


212


innovation sources and new knowledge and then charting paths from innovation to practical use. The goal is to identify areas of important improvements, and that is possible in spite of the problems which prevent us from being exhaustive.

WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE FLOW ANALYSIS? The purpose of KFA is to find and describe opportunities for improving knowledge flows around selected areas of the organization in order to do business better. As a result, KFA involves investigating, characterizing, and describing how knowledge is used, held, built, and exchanged by individuals and entities such as work groups, departments, and the organization as a whole. Typically, KFA deals more with identifying the paths, means, and utility of aggregate knowledge flows than the flows of individual knowledge items, ideas, and innovations, although some of those may be used as examples of more general activities. KF A also deals with analyzing strengths and weaknesses of existing knowledge flows and with identifying and synthesizing potential improvements. Analysis of knowledge flows is a KM activity, and must typically be undertaken by competent people such as knowledge professionals with understanding of management sciences and the organization's business. It may be considered an additional tool to support modern management methods such as TQM and BPR When we analyze knowledge flows, it may only be feasible to identify the more important ones. Therefore, we must be alert to the criticality of knowledge within the functions under investigation and set priorities for which knowledge flows to investigate. As indicated in Chapter 7, many kinds of critical situations occur as result of insufficient knowledge, inappropriate knowledge organization, or even organizational hurdles such as artificial "walls" between departments. Critical knowledge-related situations, such as CKFs, are important areas that need to be investigated in terms of the appropriateness of surrounding knowledge flows and opportunities for their improvement. As part of KF A, the value of alternatives considered for implementation must also be appraised. As is often the case with knowledge-related activities, many benefits are indirect and long-term, requiring use of comprehensive analysis. Therefore, management must be given proper perspectives of the potentials of the proposed activities, and when these are implemented,

Knowledge Flows

213

ascertain that appropriate features are included to realize the desired benefits. An important aspect of KFA deals with how knowledge is built, that is, how learning takes place by individuals, by the organization as a whole, or by other activities and processes. When considering how learning takes place in a corporate setting, we need to analyze how knowledge flows from all relevant sources to each recipient (learner) of interest. We must also identify missed learning opportunities and analyze knowledge flows both at particular moments in time and over longer periods, to ascertain that transferred knowledge is received by people or by repositories from where it can be made available and applied.

A CASE HISTORY Consider the surprise and concern of Alice Bevan, ATRA's customer service manager, who had undertaken an in-depth study of knowledge flows in her department. The study found that significant learning opportunities were not taken advantage of, much of what was learned about how to improve work practices for service delivery was not shared and, therefore, ultimately lost, and specific insights into desirable and potentially drastic changes in customer support were never considered by those who decided how customers should be supported. It was also found that customer service specialists (CSSs) did not have, or did not take advantage of, access to experts elsewhere in the organization when they needed to solve critical problems for important customers. ATRA manufactures and delivers high-technology materials. Customers use these materials to create a wide range of specialty products for industrial users and the public. The products are used under many, often demanding, conditions which require considerable expertise in order to obtain good results. As a result, the CSSs need extensive expertise and understanding of both products and customer applications. CSSs also need broad knowledge in other areas. To illustrate the proficiency required in the important knowledge areas, a general CSS knowledge profile was developed and is shown in Figure 12-1. Alice had become aware that after unresolved customer situations, and there were more of those than she thought there ought to be, all too frequently one of the 25 customer support specialists would say: ''But I knew how that should have been handled! It was just like the situation with the Sparrow Corporation;" or "If the product designers just had asked Tom and me, we would have told them that the product should be able to handle this kind of situation. We even put a message in the suggestion box to that effect!" Hence, Alice decided to study how knowledge flowed from people, from formal learning situations and formal R&D efforts to where it would be used effectively. She was convinced that there were areas she had

214


overlooked, but she could not identify them. The customer service department was investigated and analyzed for four different knowledge flow dimensions. As a result, a number of important conditions and situations were identified. Some of the most important situations that Alice decided to focus on are discussed below. Dimension 1 knowledge flow: Do the Job! Several conditions were found to impede the flow of appropriate knowledge from those who possessed it to those who needed it. On the other hand, several positive points were also observed. In summary, the findings were: STRENGTHS

• CSSs shared in-depth experiences and knowledge freely with each other in informal ways -- but only when they were not working directly on a customer assignment. • The CSSs would consult with each other during a customer help situation -- but only with brief questions and answers that could be covered verbally in seconds. • When CSSs had been to a course or obtained new technical information from R&D or Engineering, they would share that knowledge with everybody in the department by personal memos, informal technical notes, or in other nonstandard ways. WEAKNESSES

• The CSSs typically did not consult with each other at length during customer help situations when they had complex problems which they lacked expertise to cover. They might consult with other CSSs after a session with the customer and come back a day or two later with an answer or a suggestion. They did not "pool" their expertise in difficult situations. • There were many specific knowledge areas which the CSSs did not know in-depth, but the required knowledge was available in R&D or Engineering. CSSs were not supposed to contact experts directly, only by written requests through "formal channels." This procedure led to considerable customer dissatisfaction and delays. Such requests were considered a burden by the experts since they had to respond formally in writing and often needed to go through several iterations, again in writing, before issues were properly resolved. Experts and CSSs thought that these issues could be handled with much less work and result in greater customer satisfaction if they used such methods as telephone conferencing at the time of customer inquiry. • There was no organized "knowledge base" or knowledge repository -- on paper or as a computer-based system -- to provide access to cumulated experiences and knowledge on "lessons-learned" about unusual product application problems. The only formal knowledge repository was the technical product application notes issued by R&D and Engineering. • All CSSs were expert in some of the product application areas and were typically less

Knowledge Flows

215

expert in others. Nevertheless, the CSSs' areas of expertise were not considered when assigning customer requests to a CSS.

Figure 12-1. The Expertise Desired for Customer Support Specialists Shown as a Knowledge Profile for the Eight Principal Knowledge Areas.

Product Application Diagnostic Methods

How Product Is Made Desired Know

Product

Customer's Application

Customer Importance

Know Others on Team Assistance Policies

B- Beginner; N- Novice; A- Apprentice; J- Journeyman; E- Expert; M- Master; G- Grand Master

Dimension 2 knowledge flow: Do the Job Better/ Everybody was greatly interested in learning how to achieve better knowledge-transfer to the CSSs. STRENGTHS • CSSs were invited to monthly "What Is New" seminars by R&D and Engineering. Attendance was considered less important than tending to active customer request and only one third of the CSSs typically attended. • R&D and Engineering issued highly useful Technical Notes at regular intervals for their own staffs, and for Marketing, Sales, Manufacturing, and Customer Service.

216


• Outside education (university level) was funded by ATRA if it had job relevance. Time off to attend classes was not given, however. • Needs for additional CSS education and training were evaluated carefully on an individual basis and the manager attempted to build capabilities where known deficits were present. WEAKNESSES

• There was no formalized approach to capturing "lessons-learned." Feedback from the field was only anecdotal and verbal. Therefore, it was easily forgotten and reached only afew. • A tacit assumption was that when a person was promoted to CSS from Technical Support or Engineering, slhe would be fully qualified to perform the job and would only need to learn about new products and important changes as these occurred and otherwise refer to technical application notes and manuals. That assumption was too optimistic, however. • CSSs had few opportunities to visit customer sites to "see for themselves" how ATRA' s products were applied. Customer contacts were mostly by telephone and follow-up letter. Only occasionally did a CSS go to a customer's site to work on important problems which could not be resolved in the conventional manner. • There was no regular time budget for learning or education -- except for one week per year for broad companywide training and the monthly "What Is New" seminars. • There was no formal or informal feedback from Marketing or Sales-- except: "Call up this customer, they have a problem with this product and that application." • Marketing, Engineering, and R&D on occasion formed task forces to study product application problems with selected customers. CSSs were not included and results were not shared with Customer Service although they would have been useful and improved ATRA' s image with important customers. • During the last year, the two most experienced CSSs retired, resulting in a significant loss to the department. Another very experienced CSS was transferred to an overseas division. In none of these cases was any attempt made to capture these people's knowledge which, therefore, was essentially lost. Alice felt it would take two years to build up comparable knowledge in the remaining staff.

Dimension 3 knowledge flow: Improve Work Function and Work Practices! The approach to customer support and related work practices had not been revised for several years. There were no periodic reviews of how business should be conducted. STRENGTHS

• CSSs had many good ideas on how they might change their work practices to make their jobs more efficient and provide better service to the customers. • As a result of previous responsibilities, many CSSs had strong interests and insights in

Knowledge Flows

217

how they could improve the efficiency and effectiveness of delivering customer services. WEAKNESSES

• Whereas Alice suspected that it might be possible for CSSs to "work smarter," she could not see how. She did not have a background in systematizing work practices and was overloaded with pressing daily tasks to deal with particular customer situations. She was only given incentives by her superiors to concentrate on the business at hand rather than worrying about longer-term issues -- even if those in reality were more important. • Alice and several CSSs judged that there were unrealized opportunities in giving CSSs a broadened role while working directly with customers to propose products, offer product trials, and take directly related orders. • When changes in work practices were made, there was little or no consultation with the CSSs about their ideas. They were only asked to critique changes after it was too late.

Dimension 4 knowledge flow: Improve Products and Services! Decisions about new or improved products and services to customers were normally made by the Marketing Department and senior management aided by planning. I Inputs from other parts of the organization were normally not sought except to alleviate particular problems. STRENGTHS • CSSs had identified several new customer support service products which provided significant value to both customers and ARTA in terms of better market image and long-term customer loyalty.

• CSSs, through customer work, discovered opportunities for simple changes that would alleviate important application problems. These changes were often implemented. WEAKNESSES

• Some CSSs were not proficient in presenting and documenting suggestions for product changes. Nor were marketing and product design people receptive to suggestions from the field. In several instances, highly desirable product changes had been sidetracked. This had upset customer relations and two large customers had stated to senior management: "It is difficult to work with you. Your people may listen, but nothing comes of it!" • When product changes suggested by CSSs were implemented, the average time from suggestion to implementation was much too long and caused some problems in the 1 These are decisions on external product and services. Decisions on internal and

intermediate products and services were mostly made by department managers and supervisors. CSSs were consulted only to a limited extent.

----------------------------------------

218


market place. It was close to 18 months whereas only two or three months were actually needed. • Product changes and new product strategy were made without seeking inputs from Customer Service. In several instances changes, were made that, if slightly altered, could have alleviated applications problems. In other instances, changes were made that created application problems which could have been avoided if CSSs had been consulted.

Alice Bevan was surprised at the explicit weaknesses pointed out by the KFA. Many were obvious once identified, but had not been evident and made explicit before. Based on these findings, Alice worked with her superior and counterparts in other departments to take advantage of the strengths and to counteract the weaknesses. The added understanding of the strengths and weaknesses provided by the KFA made it possible to implement the recommendations without further justifications and studies. The company management was impressed by the results and provided enthusiastic support. In this case history, a number of conditions were brought to light by the KFA. This situation is not unusual. When important knowledge flows are analyzed and made explicit, many important alternatives become apparent. The issue then becomes one of identifying the most important and cost-effective ones and set priorities and schedules to implement them. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE KNOWLEDGE FLOWS IN BUSINESS Knowledge flows can be either positive or negative. Although we will primarily consider the positive ones, it is important to recognize the existence of negative flows such as when knowledge is lost or degraded in any way. It may be lost when people leave their positions, when knowledge repositories are physically lost or destroyed, or when we change the organization. On a personal level, knowledge "flows" when it is transferred from one party to another such as when apprentices learn from a master. Knowledge also flows when people learn from reading newspapers, listening to radio, or watching TV and successfully build new knowledge by abstracting and generalizing the information and organizing it to serve future purposes. Knowledge also flows from a knowledge worker to work objects when work is performed. Additional knowledge in the form of learnings also flows back to the source when knowledge is used. Knowledge increases when used since a person learns her/his job better, improves it, or obtains increased understanding by experimentation, innovation, or exploring what works and what does not.

--------------------------

Knowledge Flows

219

FOUR KNOWLEDGE FLOW FUNCTIONS On an organizational level, knowledge flows between departments, work groups, and people. It may flow by transferring individuals, by having individuals consult with one another on particular problems, or by including knowledgeable individuals on interdepartmental work teams or task forces. Knowledge flows when it is documented or formally codified in other ways and shared between different organizational entities or disseminated through paper-based, video-based, or computer-based media or systems. Knowledge also flows within a company when knowledgeable individuals are promoted. This knowledge flow is important since, when managed carefully, it allows deliberate building of expertise which is of great value to the organization's performance.! Knowledge flows can be divided into four major functions as indicated in Figure 12-2. These are discussed further in Chapter 17 on knowledge-transfer. The initial functions acquire and archive knowledge. The first function deals with building knowledge achieved through learning, importing knowledge from existing sources, or creating new knowledge through innovation, research and development activities, and by many other means. The second function deals with organizing and holding knowledge. Knowledge may be held in memory, knowledge bases, books and other written material, videotaped instruction material, and many other manifestations when it has been codified and often (but not always) organized so as to be available for specific purposes. The third function deals with distributing and pooling knowledge by assembling relevant knowledge from different sources and distributing it to where it can be used. Knowledge may be pooled by assembling different persons on a team, creating an expert network where knowledge workers consult with experts when required, or by supporting knowledge workers with a KBS of some sort. 1

Human Resources (HR) executives express that knowledge flows to build management expertise are frequently interfered with on "political grounds." Extraneous considerations may enter the process since proficiency requirements and broader capabilities for advanced positions are not explicated. Problems are associated with "who knows whom," candidates' assertiveness, their ability to secure intervention by others, and the decision-makers' qualitative and sometimes erroneous knowledge of candidates' accomplishments. HR executives expect that career and succession planning will be handled to greater business advantage when better approaches are available to express knowledge requirements and evaluate candidates' proficiencies with greater objectivity.

-----------------------------------

220


Figure 12-2. The Four Major Knowledge Flow Functions.

_.

Build Knowledge

-Learn-Import-

..

Organize & Hold Knowledge in Memory -Remember-

! I

y

Distribute & Pool Knowledge from Many Sources

~ ...

Apply Knowledge to Work Object

r-

A v

1.·-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··j

.... Knowledge Flow -··-··l> Information Flow ---(> Work Flow The fourth function is to use knowledge when knowledge workers apply it to work objects. Value is added by using knowledge to make a product or provide a service. From a micro-economic perspective, this is the function where the value of knowledge is realized. Several issues are of interest and need clarification when considering knowledge flows in business. Some are indicated in Table 12-1 with an emphasis on the general nature of aspects to be addressed. In addition, we need information about the various knowledge flows and where they can most likely be obtained. These topics are covered in the next sections as guidelines for knowledge flow investigations.!

The Four Knowledge Flow Dimensions Knowledge workers build and use professional and general knowledge in different ways. They participate actively in the various knowledge flows -- both on personal and organizational levels. They learn, organize, and use their knowledge for different purposes. Learning and other kinds of knowledge building is achieved by obtaining information and knowledge from different sources. In the context of organizational knowledge flows, these sources may include other people, company intelligence, media, formal education and 1 Chapter 3 in

Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993) provides a discussion of knowledge building, organization, pooling, and use.

Knowledge Flows

221

training, books, and learning from personal experience -- both from learningon-the-job and from life in general. Similarly, there are numerous ways to organize, store, pool, and apply knowledge in ways that are specifically appropriate for each intended purposes. Table 12-1. Typical Questions Associated with Knowledge Flows. • How does knowledge flow from the knowledge pool to the work object? • Who contributes the knowledge that will be used? Are there others who may have better or complementary knowledge? • What are the knowledge contributions of the different parties. • Who are the individuals who learn from experience on-the-job? What are their specialties? Are they in a position to feed back what they learn to improve the quality of work and otherwise help improve operations? • What are the different routes and processes for learning and knowledge building and other kinds of knowledge-transfer? • How is knowledge fed back to the functional tasks? -- To improve the way it is applied to the work objects? --To redesign work practices, work processes, and the overall system within which the tasks take place? -- To change, redesign, and create new products and services? • How can knowledge be used to work smarter? • What are the opportunities to use knowledge to improve final and intermediate products and services delivered to external and internal customers? • Where and how is good existing knowledge stored so that it is not forgotten, and how it can be accessed? • Who monitors and controls the quality of knowledge, weeding out outdated and wrong knowledge? • Is any knowledge being lost or getting into the hands of competitors?

We consider four knowledge flow dimensions as shown in Figure 12-3. They are functionally distinct and address different objectives. Normally, they are the responsibility of different organizational entities. The four knowledge flow dimensions are: Dimension 1. Do the Job!-- Apply available knowledge to make quality products and services. Dimension 2. Do the Job Better! -- Bring new operational knowledge to knowledge workers to permit them to perform their tasks better. Dimension 3. Improve the Work Function and Work Practices! -- Apply knowledge to change the system of production and service. Learn how to change and improve the system and implement such changes. Dimension 4. Improve Products and Services! -- Apply knowledge to change

222


and improve products and services and create new ones. Build, organize, and use knowledge to perform these functions. We illustrated basic aspects of knowledge flow dimensions in the ATRA case history presented earlier in this chapter. The knowledge flows complement and support many of the basic tenets of TQM. As an example, Table 12-2 illustrates major relations between the four knowledge flow dimensions and Deming's 14 points for management.!

Figure 12-3. Four Knowledge Flow Dimensions.

Apply Knowledge to Make Products &

Services

Build Knowledge to

Learn to Perform

Build Knowledge

of

Process & Work Environment to Learn to

Tasks

Better

by

Improving Work Function

of Customers Markets Technologies Competitors to

Learn to Renew

Products &

Services

' ·-··-··-·j_,._,,_ . . . .. _ .. _,,_ .. _,,j_,,_ .. _,,_,,_ .. _ .. _ ..i I

---.. Knowledge Flow -··-··-!> Information Flow --f> Work Flow

Build Knowledge

I

I

How knowledge may flow from people and other "agents" to work objects is illustrated in Figure 12-4. Knowledge flows from the primary person (knowledge worker) to a knowledge pool and from there to the work object. The knowledge pool may receive inputs from several sources and hence can contain a larger knowledge complement than that possessed by the primary person. The pool may contain knowledge embedded in systems, procedures, and standards, as well as knowledge available through consultation with others and automated KBSs.

1 Adapted from Deming (1986, pp. 23- 24).

Knowledge Flows

Table 12-2. Relations Between Knowledge Flow Dimensions and Deming's 14 Points for Total Quality Management. Dimension 1 Dimension2 Dimensions Dimension4 Apply Build Improve Improve jKnowledg( Applicatio System of Products to Work Knowledge !Production and Object ~dService Services

1. Create Constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service. 2. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age. 3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for inspection by building qualih into the product from the beginning. 4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag. Instead minimize total cost. 5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service to improve quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs. 6. Institute training on the job. 7. Institute leadership. 8. Drive out fear so that everyone may work effectively for the company. 9. Break down barriers between departments. People in research, design, sales, and production must work as a team 10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the workforce. 11. Eliminate quotas and management by objectives. 12. Remove barriers which rob people of their right to pride in workmanship. 13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement. 14. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation.

X

X

X

XXX

XX

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

XXX

X

X

XXX

XX

X

XX

XX

XX

XXX

XX

X

X

X

X

Legend: xxx: Relates directly; xx: Relates in part; x: Relates indirectly

DIMENSION 1: DO THE JOB! MAKE KNOWLEDGE AVAILABLE AND APPLY IT TO MAKE PRODUCTS AND PROVIDE SERVICES Dimension 1 knowledge flows take place from the primary knowledge worker (through the combined knowledge pool) to the work object when a work


224


task is performed -- to make products and provide services. This is the important activity where the value of knowledge is realized as result of actual work -- knowledge is translated into salable products and services. Figure 12-4. Apply Knowledge to The Work Object as an Integral Part of the Work Function. (Dimension 1 Knowledge Flow).

Suppliers

[I]

Knowledge Bases

Customers Flow Information Flow ---[> Work Flow ------~~~Knowledge

-··-··~

In practice, the "primary knowledge worker" may be a single person; a group of knowledge workers who are pooling their knowledge to perform their tasks; one or several people supported by KESs or other automated or nonautomated knowledge repositories (as indicated in Figure 12-4); or a fully automated function with no people involvement, as when payroll or tax return preparation systems perform automatic calculations.

-------------------------------

Knowledge Flows

225

Knowledge can be applied to the work object in many ways. When the work object is changed by means of knowledge, it is improved in some way -application of knowledge adds value to it. The magnitude of the value-added contribution depends on several factors: scarcity and market value of the knowledge applied, market value of the product that is generated, and knowledge's marginal contribution to the improvement of the product. The most common way for knowledge to be applied is when a knowledge worker operates on the work object to improve it. For example, it may be changed physically (as when a mechanic repairs a transmission) or intellectual content may be added to it (as when a loan officer provides an evaluation of a commercial loan application). Further, when a customer service specialist advises a customer about the use of a product, the customer's problem situation becomes the work object, which is then improved as the CSS provides knowledge to clarify issues and steers the customer towards workable ways of handling the problem situation. Knowledge can also be applied to the work object by automated means. When a robot paints a car body, considerable knowledge is embedded in the process: in the selection of the robot and the tools, in the program which operates the robot, and in the way the car body has been fashioned to facilitate automated painting. In this case the knowledge applied to the work object may be narrow. For example, the number of exception situations that can be handled by the automated system is limited and, as a result, the knowledgedelivery process is rigid and not easily changed. In contrast, when the knowledge delivery system is a versatile person, the process can be very flexible and handle a wide range of exceptions and anomalies. In analyzing Dimension 1 knowledge flows, we investigate, describe, and analyze how knowledge is made available by being accessed and retrieved from knowledge holders; pooled; and then used to make products and services. We also explore and synthesize opportunities to improve the situation, as it is now, or should be changed, to serve the organization better. This knowledge flow was shown in Figure 12-4 in general terms along with the major components in the associated system. Major components in Dimension 1 knowledge flows include people, artifacts, work aids, and activities of the work function. (Note similarities to TEA.) In addition, we also need to include components external to the work function as was indicated schematically in Figure 12-4. The external components consist of people, artifacts, services, and systems as well as other items and entities when appropriate. Major components we considered this

226


context include: • Incoming work object(s) from supplier(s) • Work flow stages and tasks within the work function • Work objects by stage • Knowledge requirements to perform quality work for each work task • Knowledge availability at each work stage • Knowledge sources • Knowledge pool -- or pools -- separately by work stage when applicable As we analyze how knowledge is applied to the work objects, we often find opportunities to improve the knowledge flows by identifying groups of individuals who ought to collaborate and others with whom the function's knowledge workers should network. We also may find that departmental practices need to be revised to facilitate collaboration and consultation with others. In some instances, we discover that it is necessary to provide incentives to improve the way people from different departments work together. Many of these solutions may be quick and easy to implement once identified. However, we may also find important needs for more formal and technical solutions such as development and deployment of KBS applications. Such solutions are more costly and require careful benefit analysis and planning to ascertain that they warrant being undertaken. DIMENSION 2: DO THE JOB BETTER! IMPROVE WORKERS' APPLICATION KNOWLEDGE Dimension 2 knowledge flows enable people to "work smarter."l To work smarter, people need to obtain knowledge and understanding of the principles and operating objectives that underlie their job function. They need to command systematic knowledge.2 This focuses attention on the need to educating people to deal with exceptions and become versatile in addition to training them to perform routine functions. Of increasing importance is the need to prepare people and other "active agents" (such as automated robots, KBSs in service industries) to possess more and better knowledge to be able to work flexibly to perform different jobs as 1 See Chapter 3 of Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993) for a discussion of "working smarter." 2 See definition of "systematic knowledge" in Chapter 2.

Knowledge Flows

required, and to be versatile to handle more exception situations and anomalies as part of their normal responsibilities. These requirements require that workers possess deeper knowledge of their tasks, broader knowledge of a great many areas, and increased mental agility. An example of the broader knowledge requirements expected for a supervisor in a modern company is indicated in Figure 12-5. Figure 12-5. Example of Broad Knowledge Requirements. Proficienc in

Application of Professional Knowledge

Proficienc in

Primary Professional Area

Proficienc in

Job Functions & Company Matters

Desired Job Profile Proficien

Adjacent & Supporting Professional Areas

Facilitation

Entrepreneurship Negotiations & Sales

World Matters & Broad Perspectives

Communication & Human Skills

Conceptualizing &

Abstracting

Legend: B- Beginner; N- Novice; A- Apprentice; C- Competent; E- Expert Dimension 2 knowledge flows bring new knowledge to the knowledge worker to enable him or her to do the job better. This knowledge is associated


with: "What do I need to know to do my primary job better?" These knowledge flows involve many types of knowledge building and learning as indicated in Figure 12-6. Not shown in the figure are the knowledge flows to knowledge bases and secondary knowledge workers who also may contribute to the knowledge pool used to do the job. The major components in Dimension 2 knowledge flows include parts of the work function, in addition to external components as indicated schematically in Figure 12-6. The major components to be considered in this context include: • Knowledge-building processes. Examples: education, training, personal experimentation, and innovation.

Figure 12-6. Build Knowledge to Be Applied in the Work Function. (Dimension 2 Knowledge Flow). Knowledge Building Domain

Knowledge Use Domain

Intelligence from all Media

Apprenticing & On-the-job Feedback

Knowledge Flow Information Flow --t> Work Flow -----~~~

-··-··i>

Personal Experiences

Knowledge Flows

• Knowledge and information sources. Examples: learning-on-the-job; apprenticing; company training programs; computer-based training systems (CBTs); formal education; information and knowledge obtained through media; books and scientific journals; KBS applications; and daily life exposures. • Knowledge recipients (knowledge holders). Examples: principal knowledge worker; external knowledge workers (external to work function); automated knowledge bases; and documents. • The function's knowledge and expertise requirements. Perhaps the most important flows in this dimension are the on-the-job feedback and learning which takes place by abstracting, generalizing, and organizing personal experiences of this kind. Such learning is often caused by knowledge workers who pursue ideas or are inventive and creative. Another flow of importance is learning to network with peers, suppliers, customers, knowledge sources, and all others with whom the knowledge worker needs to work to perform the assigned tasks. We frequently find many opportunities to build applications knowledge. Since knowledge building takes considerable time and effort, it is important to carefully evaluate benefits and costs before committing to a particular course of action. Typical alternatives that prove to be valuable and important include self-study programs and regular provision of targeted small-scale educational and training activities. These are often facilitated by making available highquality educational material and implementing explicit incentives. In recent years, multimedia computer-based training systems have become available for general subjects and the cost of developing specific ones has been significantly reduced. These alternatives are often exceptionally effective and economical. Other alternatives that frequently need to be implemented deal with capturing knowledge from departing personnel in a thorough and wellconceived manner. DIMENSION 3: IMPROVE THE WORK FUNCTION AND WORK PRACTICES! LEARN AND WORK EFFECTIVELY TO CHANGE AND IMPROVE THE SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION AND SERVICE An important aspects of the modern knowledge worker's function is to participate in the process of changing and improving the workplace to provide better products and services. This is a result of modern management initiatives, in particular TQM, BPR, Learning Organizations, and similar

230


approaches, which focus on improving the performance of the whole organization by improving the performance of the individual while at the same time making the work system more effective. Gains are to a great extent achieved by "working smart." However, empowering individuals requires considerable broadening of everyone's knowledge -- it also requires changing management attitudes and practices. To perform such work properly, the knowledge workers need to develop a good sense of systems thinking. I Dimension 3 knowledge flows deal with knowledge about the broader aspects of the task environment which allow individual knowledge workers to contribute to improving the system of production and service. When managed appropriately, these flows help improve the capability to redesign the work function to generate products and services already defined. These knowledge flows are of great importance for organizations which "continually and forever" change themselves to improve operations to maintain competitiveness. Dimension 3 knowledge flows are indicated schematically in Figure 12-7. An important Dimension 3 knowledge flow pertains to making institutional changes to facilitate and support effective performance. Applying this knowledge results in restructuring the organization, reorganizing the work environment, changing the staffing and expertise requirements to perform different tasks, and providing different support systems for the work functions. Whereas this knowledge flow is associated with changing the system, it also affects the ability to do the job, and hence bridging the gap between Dimensions 2 and 3. Dimension 3 knowledge flow nodes include the knowledge workers and their knowledge-related work aids. As indicated in Figure 12-7, we also need to include components external to the work function. Many interesting and valuable opportunities are identified and explicated when analyzing knowledge flows. They primarily relate to improving the "system of production and service." Some opportunities typically involve the need to "lower barriers between departments" to allow knowledge workers from different groups to collaborate on how to change the system. Others may deal with providing knowledge workers with a better and more comprehensive 1 Systems thinking does not refer to "information systems." Instead, it refers to a much broader and comprehensive perspective ofhow components of larger entities work together and how their activities need to be coordinated to facilitate effective and smooth operation without conflicts and inefficiencies. Systems thinking embraces concepts to deal with dynamic situations where many parallel activities are coupled and affect each other in complex, often nonlinear, ways.

231

Knowledge Flows

understanding of their operations, particularly how their own and adjacent functions fit into the whole organization. Other barriers to be overcome include Not Invented Here (NIH) syndromes and reduction of competition between neighboring departments that should collaborate instead of competing. Many desirable changes found from Dimension 3 KF A require changes in people's incentives, mental models, paradigms, and beliefs of what constitutes appropriate behavior. Figure 12-7. Learn and Work Effectively to Improve the System of Production

and Service. (Dimension 3 Knowledge Flow).

Build Knowledge

Apply

Knowledge

to

to Make

Products &: Services

.'

' ·. '\ . . ·. ·, ·. .

·, ' ·, '·

·, .

·.

·~

--1..,• Knowledge Flow Information Flow --[> Work Flow - .. - .. -t;>

I

.

' ·- .. :L. .. ...;I .. _ ..

.. _ .. _ .. ...J .. _ .. __

---~-~----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----------------


DIMENSION 4: IMPROVE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES! BUILD, ORGANIZE, AND USE KNOWLEDGE TO RENEW AND IMPROVE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES AND CREATE NEW ONES Dimension 4 knowledge flows deal with a broad spectrum of issues. The major concern is to constantly improve the internal and external products and services. Internal product changes affect the organizations' external products and services. For example, when a loan officer evaluates an application from a bank customer, the speed and thoroughness of the evaluation directly affect the final product as seen by the customer. Yet, it is an internal product that can be changed, systematized, or streamlined without affecting other aspects of the external product. When we ask knowledge workers to participate in improving and renewing the products and services they deliver, we implicitly ask them to participate in redesigning the overall flow of products and services. This system is complex and typically involves many parties. They need to coordinate their plans and activities to ascertain that the overall system operates soundly and produces high-quality deliverables without errors, delays, and inefficiencies. It may be problematic to include additional parties (such as knowledge workers "on the line") into this process, since this would requires additional considerations and integration which in turn results in making the project even more complex. Yet, these workers have knowledge which is very valuable to the final outcome. Therefore, when external or intermediate products and services are designed and specified without involvement of knowledge workers with hands-on knowledge, undesirable outcomes are often the result, since many decisions are based on insufficient knowledge. Dimension 4 knowledge flows deal with building and using knowledge to renew and improve the intermediate and external products and services and to involve different knowledge flows as indicated in Figure 12-8. Some flows are formal, associated with learning or becoming proficient in creating new and improved products and services. These may include education in class-room settings, public seminars, etc., and can be well-defined and understood. Other knowledge flows deal with sharing knowledge about the world in general -things that previously were considered outside the normal professional arena for the knowledge workers responsible for these functions. Some of these knowledge flows may be arbitrary and even ephemeral and, therefore, not well-defined or well-understood.

------------------

Knowledge Flows

KFA may generate interesting opportunities to improve learning and sharing knowledge by communicating better to change products or facilitate operations for customers. In many instances, we may find it effective to work closer with suppliers to modify their products to facilitate operations, or to improve product features. There will also be other opportunities for improved knowledge flows which may be quite similar to those found for Dimension 3 such as reduction of barriers and elimination of syndromes such as NIH.

Figure 12-8. Build, Organize, and Use Knowledge to Renew and Improve Products and Services. (Dimension 4 Knowledge Flow).

Build Knowledge to

Learn to Perform Tasks Better

Build Knowledge of Process& Work

Envi~t ~G2~~~±()~!# Learn to Work Smarter

by Improving Work Function

' ·. '' .' ·. .·,

'

·. I ! I ! ·. '· '· ._,,L : .. ..;i .. _ .. _ .. _,,l.: .. ....:i.. -··-· · ...... _,_,,_J,,_,_,,_,,_,_I.- .. - .. -

----. Knowledge Flow - .. - .. .;:. Information Flow --t> Work Flow

We often find it necessary to broaden the knowledge of the function's senior knowledge workers as part of preparing them to assist in the process. Frequently, they must be provided with insights into which products exist and how they are used in different areas of the organization or by customers, what the organization's plans and goals are, and how the overall design and product creation process works. These needs are similar to those discussed

234


under Dimension 2 and are also often needed for Dimension 3. Knowledge can also be made available to flow in a more structured manner from the target function to areas responsible for carrying out design and definition of products and services. An example is from a manufacturing organization, where management saw the need to capture the expertise in the function under study in a KBS for deployment in the design department to make that expertise available on a continuous basis. The design engineers were able to pool the experts' knowledge with their own as part of their application of knowledge to their work objects. Additionally, when the experts obtained new knowledge, they were able to periodically include it into the KBS.

Other Aspects of Knowledge Flows HOW IMPORTANT ARE KNOWLEDGE FLOWS? It is important to emphasize that the economic value of each knowledge flow dimension may be of varying importance over time. In the short term, Dimension 1 knowledge flows are of the highest importance since their value is realized immediately. Knowledge workers use their knowledge to "do the job" and apply direct knowledge to provide value-added contributions to the work object. Dimension 1 knowledge flows is a full-time job for most. While the importance of the other knowledge flows is also significant, their value will be realized in the future. For example, dimension 2 requires significant time and effort to continually improve performance. As for activities associated with Dimensions 3 and 4, these occupy only small portions of typical knowledge workers' time, whose primary function is to perform "the job" to make products and provide services on time, with excellent quality, and as effectively as possible. However, their contributions to higher dimension knowledge flows should not be minimized. People who deal directly with details of production and with internal and external customers possess valuable insights. The quality of these contributions may exceed that of more "distant" planners and may be crucial to the organization's survival. The relative time knowledge workers might typically devote to different knowledge flow dimensions is indicated schematically in Figure 12-9.

Knowledge Flows

Figure 12-9. Typical Knowledge Worker's Ideal Devotion of 'lime to the Different Knowledge Flow Dimensions and Importance of Contributions. Time that Might Be Devoted to Each Knowledge Flow Dimension by Typical Knowledge Worker

Knowledge Flow

Dimension,_----~.,-""""-~~;;;;;;~

Important

Significantly Important

Long-Term Importance

SECONDARY KNOWLEDGE FLOWS In addition to the four primary knowledge flow dimensions described above, secondary knowledge flows are associated with the ancillary functions which knowledge workers perform. Secondary flows may, for example, be to learn about and apply knowledge to administrative issues related to employment conditions. Knowledge workers will also learn about and use knowledge about their company's traditions and culture. These secondary knowledge flows are excluded from our normal KFA considerations. However, they are of considerable importance for the social health and other aspects of the organization's welfare.

UNDESIRABLE KNOWLEDGE FLOWS While most knowledge flows are positive and beneficial, some are highly undesirable and destructive and, therefore, should be avoided. Examples of

236


knowledge flows that should be avoided include: • Flows of important knowledge to competitors through careless handling of competitive knowledge (publication, sharing in industry associations, etc.), loss of personnel to competitors, and industrial espionage. • Loss of knowledge from the organization through attrition from the target function through reassignments, promotions, resignations, firings, and retirement without retaining expert knowledge. • Flows of erroneous and low-quality knowledge when misrepresented as sound expertise. • Flow of intentional misinformation. • Excessively formalized knowledge flows which require extensive effort to exercise and which are very slow. • Loss of formalized knowledge (in knowledge repositories such as books, knowledge bases, etc.) by nonuse, relocations, or physical destruction and loss. (Perfectly good and valid operations manuals or advisory computer systems have become unusable in critical situations after long periods of nonuse since no one know how to use them.) HURDLES TO KNOWLEDGE FLOWS Considerable hurdles exist which prevent sharing knowledge or letting it flow freely and productively. That leads to considerable inefficiencies in operational effectiveness and causes the organization to be a slow learner. Some examples involve situations where there are: • Short-term management perspectives, which de-emphasize education, training, and growth of knowledge in favor of "getting the work done" -- to generate cash, cut costs, or meet pressing operational objectives. • Traditions to "keep my knowledge close to my chest" with no incentive to perform team work, no rewards associated with helping others grow, where one is only rewarded for personal achievements and direct contributions, or where there is high competition among individuals. • High walls between departments caused by "working through the hierarchy" and where crossing departmental lines is considered unacceptable. These conditions also exist where there are strong "Taylorism" traditions. • No mechanisms or system for sharing knowledge. • No time or opportunities allowed for exchanging views-- and, therefore, knowledge. • Pervasive "NIH" (not invented here) syndromes. • Strong resistance against, and fear of, change.

Knowledge Flows

237

KNOWLEDGE FLOW FACILITATORS Organizations have many opportunities to facilitate knowledge flows. These range from providing incentives to changing systems and practices. Examples include: • Provide incentives to help others and share knowledge. Such incentives must be tied to advancements, recognition, status, and compensation. • Foster collaboration with participation from diverse departments and different geographic and organizational groups. Promote incentives to facilitate collaborative work.l • Provide negative incentives to discourage "knowledge herding." • Provide systems and procedures for knowledge sharing through internal seminars and technical papers, internal electronic mail, etc. • Support continued education and training of all personnel. • Foster participation in external professional activities, visits to advanced practitioners, and other types of benchmarking. • Promote cross-training for functional flexibility and personal versatility. KNOWLEDGE FLOW ANALYSIS DELIVERABLES KFA deliverables may be very comprehensive, depending on the particular situation. Deliverables range from narratives and verbal descriptions to categorized tables, to flow diagrams depicting how knowledge and other flows between nodes. Examples of deliverables are included in Table 12-3. A KFA deliverable example is the corporate knowledge flows surrounding a high-technology company (FOAC, Inc.) as illustrated in Figure 12-10. This company was interested in mapping knowledge interchanges with outside parties to monitor and manage beneficial exchanges, knowledge losses, and related conditions. Specific characteristics of each of these 13 knowledge flows were examined in detail resulting in considerable insights into the four "TOWS." Based upon these results, FOAC was able to change many of its operating practices. For example, its relationship with suppliers had always been cautious. However, after the knowledge-implications analysis was completed, FOAC's executives decided that the risk of losing knowledge and control was much less than previously perceived. They increased reliance on selected suppliers by sharing 1 See discussion of collaboration in Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993).

--------------------


238


new product specifications and plans and in return obtained valuable product design ideas and assistance.

Table 12-3. Typical Deliverables from Knowledge Flow Analysis. • Description of target function from business and operational perspectives. • Description of the operational and business situation -- typically using diagrams of: -- organizational hierarchy --knowledge, work, information, and communication flows The description needs to specify operational objectives and responsibilities, operational functions, and related operational perspectives. It also needs to include business objectives and responsibilities, business functions, and related business perspectives. • Descriptions of knowledge flow strengths and weaknesses for each knowledge flow dimension. • Descriptions of potential alternatives to exploit strengths and alleviate weaknesses to achieve better operational effectiveness, competitive strength, and other strategic advantages. • Knowledge flow diagrams (one diagram for each knowledge dimension) showing existing knowledge flows and potentials for new knowledge flows. • Work tasks (by stage) and their knowledge requirements and knowledge availabilities. As part of this picture, possibilities are identified to shift K-1 tasks to adjacent functions.

OTHER SUPPORT APPROACHES It is sometimes desirable to support knowledge flow analysis with dynamic simulations of knowledge building, transforms, and transfer activities to examine and illustrate the effects of improving various knowledge flows. Of major interest are the effects of speeding up learning and training, decisionmaking, and knowledge-transfer between different organizational entities. Another area of interest is the redistribution of knowledge by making it available to several functions to increase their versatility which, in tum, will increase their capabilities to deal with a greater range of work.

---

--------------------------

Knowledge Flows

Z39

Figure 12-10. Example of Corporate Knowledge Flows Corporate knowledge flow example;. Patents

•

Professional Exchanges

9

~11,____ _-----..

Specific Technical Solutions

Solved & ~~!lld11 Some Some Unsolved

~

12 /(. Special Solutions 1 (at times these are FOAC's)

~

Problems

Specifics on Difficuh Techn. Problems

Knowl Sources Many Problem Solutions

Important Technology Solutions

FOAC

Special Problem Opportunities for Suppliers

Proprietary Design Methods & Technologies

• I

4 I

What Can Be Made; Costs& Trade-Oils

t

~

New Product Features & Component Specs

~

3

~

Specialty Suppliers

2 Customer Application Needs & Plans Future Plans & SpeciaHy Products

10 Specific Technical Solutions

Contract Technicians

/

~7I Special& Proprietary Design Expertise

t

Compethive Products & Plans

New Products Manu!. Methods Cust. Needs

~

~

13

FOAC's Proprietary Solutions

I

Special Features \_.... & Application Needs ,_Eagqeuem~

4

Compethors' Proprietary Solutions

&

.----'~I

Customers

5

/

Universities

FOAC Capabilities & Plans Special Needs

.e._ti-to_r_s_~

"',-C-o_m_p-'

-

..

-

... ~1----t~~ Notable

..~-----1••

Important

240


Chapter

13

Object-Oriented KADS Approach to Kno\Vledge Managen1ent1 2

By Karen M. Gardner, Ph. D.

Knowledge Management --A Position Statement The depth and richness of the concept "knowledge" implies the need to select a particular view of this concept in order to reasonably bound one's inquiries. Yet it is important to remember that one's view is just one of many possible views. The "lens" through which we (CSC's Object-Oriented Group [OOG]) view knowledge is based on our working definition of knowledge:

Knowledge is the understanding of the relative importance of an organization's data and information with the ability to know, under any given circumstance (e.g., a specific problem) what data I information is needed, ll..ruJL this data I information can best be used, w.Ju_ this data/information is important, where this data/information is located, and how it can be obtained and when this data/information is needed. Thus, knowledge is not, in our view, a specific piece of data or information but rather a kind of meta-knowing about an organization's information. We call a person who has this kind of meta-knowing an "expert"; an organization that has modeled and structured this kind of meta-knowing and consciously values and uses it, a "knowledge organization"; an organization that promulgates and seeks continual feedback regarding it, a "learning organization"; and a system that is based on it, "intelligent." Closely associated with our view of "knowledge" is the notion of "problemsolving" -- a process with goals, objectives and obstacles that requires some 1 © Copyright by Karen M. Gardner. Address inquiries to Karen M. Gardner, Partner and Manager, Object Oriented Group, CSC National, 444 Market St., Suite 870, San Francisco, CA 94610, (415) 395-7965, Karen_Gardner/NATUPART/[email protected] 2 This chapter is based on a 1993 working paper and does not fully reflect recent advances.

242


kind of reasoning or pattern matching to achieve its goal. The OOG tends to think of humans and organizations as primarily problem-solvers, involved in problem-solving processes. When applied to systems, the result of this notion is often called a "knowledge-based system" (KBS). However, even on-line transaction processing can be considered a kind of problem-solving. When this view of "problem-solving" is applied to organizations, their processes are modeled from the point of view of problem-solving tasks. For instance, a billing process is modeled using KADS templates and is, thus, perceived as a series of problem-solving activities that may include, for example, planning, monitoring, and diagnosing. Thus, the work OOG does is placed within a framework of knowledge and problem-solving. When modeling an organization, our contribution to knowledge management is the meta view of "knowledge" and its close kin "problem-solving." The two representations that are used by the OOG are KADS (emphasizing the model of expertise) and objects. The KADS templates are mapped to objects (actually the templates help identify the domain objects) and so both organizations and systems are modeled as sets of collaborating, negotiating objects within a problem-solving framework. To use a previous example, a billing process is modeled as a series of problem-solving activities requiring certain data/information. These problem-solving activities consist of further sets of nested problem-solving activities, and so forth. The data/information (now represented as objects) required to obtain the desired goals and objectives of each problem-solving activity is identified and modeled in terms of what data/information is needed, when it is needed, why it is needed, how it can be accessed, and where it can be accessed. If an organization models all of its core business and sustaining processes from this perspective and reorganizes itself to take advantage of this metaknowledge, it begins to resemble a "knowledge organization." If, in addition to using this approach, an organization places emphasis on reusability, knowledge reengineering and "lessons-learned," then it begins to resemble a "learning organization." The notions of "knowledge" and "problem-solving" discussed here are intriguing for their own sake. But more importantly, they have practical applications. Their use and implementation assist organizations in viewing themselves as a set of dynamic problem-solving processes rather than a stale set of data flows and process hand-offs. The use of these notions by the OOG provides a context for dealing with the complexity of organizations and systems. In addition, they (and ways of modeling them) provide a consistent

Object-Oriented KADS Approach to Knowledge Management

way of looking at the activities of an organization. For example,, the notions of knowledge and problem-solving are applicable from the highest level of abstraction (e.g., the planning function of an organization), down through a lower level of abstraction (e.g., performance engineering), and finally to the lowest level of abstraction (e.g., sorting records). In other words, the KADS templates serve as the universal language of communication from top to bottom. (We are particularly excited about the application ofKADS to modeling object-oriented (00) technical architecture).

Cognitive Modeling of Business Practices Articles in various business publications are replete with clarion calls for U.S. industries to restructure themselves to meet the competitive challenges facing them in the foreseeable future. Viewing business practices from a new conceptual basis is often cited as the greatest need.l This chapter presents a successfully implemented cognitive based methodology for modeling practices (in a reengineering environment or in a continuous improvement environment) using a task structure and an emphasis on problem-solving and the use of knowledge. This cognitive modeling approach views organizations as problem-solving, results oriented, knowledge using organisms. These models are then mapped to an objectoriented notation, but this activity is not discussed in this chapter. However, a business process modeling and reengineering requires more than a methodology. Such elements as benchmarking, the use of specific techniques for determining costs, and change management methods and important ingredients for a successful business process modeling program. The discussion is limited to the role of KADS-OBJECT as a modeling methodology -- a methodology that has proven very successful in our consulting practice, and which is based on public domain research, primarily the European ESPRIT KADS research on knowledge modeling)2 A case study is presented which illustrates the use of the approach at a manufacturing plant to model existing fabrication tasks, and to reengineer those tasks.

1 See Stalk et al. (1992), Hammer (1990), Senge (1990), and Knorr (1991).

2 See Wielinga et al (1992a) and de Hoog et al (1992).

---------------------------------------

244


BUSINESS PRACTICE MODELING AND REENGINEERING Two methods for viewing business practices -- business process modeling and business process reengineering (BPR) -- are frequently recommended, and have in effect, become buzz-words of the 1990's. In an era where the challenges of a competitive marketplace dictate quick and innovative responses, process modeling is seen as an important technique that can be used to identify and evaluate existing business processes. The information gained from this effort is then used to help develop better (that is, quick, more productive, and innovative) ways of doing things (the reengineering component) within an organization. Process modeling is an attempt to examine an organization through the lens of logical rather than functional processes. This is done for the very valid reason that the major issues that companies must address cross traditional functional boundaries. For instance, evaluating and modeling the accounts receivable processes is an example of analyses that are functionally based, while looking at the process with which a product is produced would necessitate tracing the work flow through a number of functional departments (marketing, design, fabrication, and so forth). While this cross-functional approach has merit, based on our consulting experience, it is not sufficient. Compared with previous methods (e.g., departmental based studies), process modeling more naturally reflects the workings of an organization. Yet, it is still not entirely isomorphic to the way an organization accomplishes its goals and objectives. What's missing? The view of the organization and its processes as results-oriented, knowledgeusing, problem-solving organisms. ORGANIZATIONS AS RESULTS-ORIENTED, KNOWLEDGE-USING, AND PROBLEM-SOLVING ORGANISMS A succession of recent important publications have highlighted the importance of knowledge and problem-solving within an organization. In a recent survey of Fortune 100 company executives undertaken by The Wiig Group, 1 the majority of CEOs surveyed stated that knowledge and problem-solving expertise were considered to be their organization's most valuable assets. Yet, they admitted that they did not know how to identify knowledge, nor how to properly manage it. They were keenly interested in 1 Wiig (1990b).


245

finding, describing and evaluating critical knowledge, but did not know how to practically obtain this information. Similarly, Dorothy Leonard-Barton emphasizes the role of knowledge in obtaining and maintaining competitive advantage in her article, "The Factory as a Learning Laboratory";! Nonaka2 discusses the concept of the emerging knowledge-based organization, and John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene state in their book Megatrends 2000, "... we are drowning in information and starved for knowledge."3 COGNITIVE MODELING A model of the enterprise (either existing or proposed) based on the approach provides an organization with a more holistic view of its business practices. This view explicitly applies the concepts of problem-solving and knowledge to process modeling, and can assist an organization in identifying and evaluating its core competencies and strategic capabilities, as well as providing a mechanism by which business practices can be automated and/or reengineered. CORE ASSUMPTIONS Before exploring this approach in greater detail, the eight core assumptions of our cognitive modeling approach are given below. Cognitive modeling shares with industrial engineering an emphasis on modeling decisionmaking, but differs in its stress on the role of knowledge. 1. Cognitive modeling is behavior-oriented It is dynamic, emphasizing the role of knowledge and problem-solving in business processes. In our experience, when human beings are involved in processes, they generally envision themselves as attempting to achieve results, or resolve some problem which is keeping them from achieving the desired results. 2. Cognitive modeling emphasizes tasks (processes) and the results of tasks (processes). In order to achieve results, people perform a number of tasks. A "task" (or "process") is defined as a generic, high-level step/activity which is independent of data. Depending on the level of abstraction of interest for a particular project, each task may be a meta-process, a process, or a subprocess. 1 Leonard-Barton (1992). 2 Nonaka (1991). 3 Naisbett & Aburdene (1990).

246


3. Cognitive modeling distinguishes between data, information and knowledge. Knowledge is the application of (generally) human judgment and expertise to the use of information and data. Data are raw facts (e.g., "kevlar material"), whereas information is data provided with meaning (e.g., a table showing allowable materials). 4. Cognitive modeling emphasizes the role of knowledge within an organization. Knowledge is considered a major corporate asset.l 5. Cognitive modeling (meta knowing about data and information) emphasizes the role of expertise within an organization. Expertise can be defined as knowing ~ knowledge to use, why knowledge is needed, when its use is appropriate, where it is located, and how to use it. Improvements in existing expertise can be sought as part of the engineering component of the modeling effort. 6. Cognitive modeling emphasizes the role of problem-solving within an organization. Problem-solving is an activity that takes place when people encounter obstacles in achieving desired results, or feel a need to find a "path" (i.e., reason) to a solution because of the complexity of a task. Problem-solving requires the use of knowledge. It is important to identify the logical "disconnects" (missing, redundant, incorrect or non-value parts of tasks/process and problem-solving) in problem-solving. 7. Cognitive modeling posits the existence of problem-solving templates. Based on over 120 man-years of research, the European KADS ESPRIT Project2 discovered the existence of problem-solving templates which serve as underlying algorithms for tasks. They exist to help structure the complexity of reasoning when accomplishing a task or solving a problem. These templates are domain independent. In other words, the reasoning pattern of a diagnostic task remains essentially the same whether the domain is troubleshooting a computer network, diagnosing the cause of machine failure, or determining the cause of a person's medical symptoms. What differs is the type and amount of knowledge that is used. These templates can best be considered minimalist blueprints, as usually they must be modified to suit particular situations. For instance, when you decide to build a house, you might buy blueprints for a generic house. However, you may need to add a couple of bedrooms and another bathroom to meet the needs of your family. The key here is that you did not purchase a blueprint for something other than a house (e.g., a factory, a grocery store, a theater), and then try to modify it to suit the needs of your family. Figure 13-1 shows an example of a template. Templates consist of configurations of rectangles and ovals. Every rectangle serves as a place holder or repository for specific kinds of knowledge that will be needed by the inference (the ovals) that follows. 1 See Leonard-Barton (1992), Nonaka (1991), and Wiig (1990). 2 See Wielinga et al. (1992) and de Hoog et al. (1992).


247

Figure 13-1. Problem-Solving Template Example.

Complaint

Systematic Diagnosis Template Definition: The process of determining the cause and location of a problem.

Data Values

Each rectangle describes the role which the domain-specific knowledge "within" that rectangle will play. Note that each inference has a name. This name refers to the type of cognitive inference that is expected to operate on the knowledge at a certain point when this template is used. Expert performance, novice performance, training manuals, etc., can be modeled, measured, and evaluated in terms of these templates. That is, what data/information is used when completing a task or solving a problem, when and how it is used, and the extent to which it contributes to desired outcomes, can all be determined. 8. Cognitive modeling requires the use of specific techniques. Specific techniques are required to identify the often obscured tasks and knowledge

~~-

-~~~-~-~--------------------------------------

248


people use. Much of human judgment and problem-solving is hidden, automatic or "compiled"; therefore, special techniques must be used to gain access to this important material. An example of compiled knowledge is the act of tying your shoelaces. Although you know quite well how to tie your shoelace, explaining to another person how it is done is very difficult. An example of a cognitive modeling technique is "concept sorting." Its purpose is to capture relationships between and among concepts (i.e., the elements that make up the data, information and knowledge in a task). After a number of concepts associated with a particular task have been identified, they can be grouped by their relationships with one another. Generally, the concept sorting activity is accomplished by the employees who are actually involved in completing a particular task. The results allow participants to see and compare how they structure and view the data, information and knowledge that is used when they complete the particular task. For example, often, experts structure their concepts differently (and more effectively) than do novices. This understanding has led companies to reengineer their training and continuous improvement efforts, focusing on "best practice" in terms of the data/information/knowledge used. RECOGNIZING A NEED To better understand the cognitive modeling approach, we will now consider the experience of "Best Instrument, Inc.," a name we'll give to a large, complex industrial instrumentation manufacturing company that designs and builds a number of small, technical components (e.g., sensing mechanisms). These components are assembled into various predefined, but changing, configurations of instruments for customers around the world. The company's approach to manufacturing was a variant on the "design and then throw it over the wall to fabrication" approach. Design engineers communicated to fabrication engineers, and visa versa, on an ad hoc, "as needed" basis, was usually motivated by quality problems and the necessity to question design assumptions when fabrication became difficult and timeconsuming. Although management at Best Instrument, Inc. had traditionally been risk adverse, they realized that they were losing market share to competitors who had shortened the product development cycle, reduced failure rates, improved quality and increased production volume. As one executive stated, "the bandaid approach to problems that we had utilized for years wasn't going to work for us anymore." As a result, Best Instrument, Inc.'s management decided to take the risk, and investigate better ways of doing business by modeling their existing business practices, and then re-


249

engineer these business practices. To illustrate the cognitive modeling activities, the discussion below only focuses on the fabrication portion of the entire production process for an instrument we'll call "instrument #12." ESTABLISHING GOALS The goal was to model the current method of producing this particular instrument, identifying the problems inherent in the existing cycle, and then reengineering the entire process. The "instrument #12" fabrication work unit consisted of approximately 30 shop floor fabricators. This work unit's responsibilities involved very detailed and complicated state-of-the-art fabrication processes driven by customer requirements (that is, constraints). Although "instrument #12" was one product, as many as 17 different versions were fabricated every year, depending on customers' changing needs (e.g., requests for higher temperature tolerances). Activities in this dynamic work unit were viewed as "knowledge-intensive," requiring excellent judgment, good problem-solving skills, as well as competencies in applying processes and operating the fabrication tools and equipment. COGNITIVE MODELING ACTIVITIES As part of the cognitive modeling effort, the consultants completed the following activities: 1. Identification ofthose individuals within the work unit who were expert in the fabrication ofinstrument #12, as indicated by their superior performance reviews and as determined by the supervisor. In this environment, expertise was a very important element. Expert performance indicated superior access to sources of knowledge and its use, as well as proven problem-solving capabilities. While all organizations can benefit from an improvement in their business practices, it is important to retain the capabilities at which they excel (best practices). In the case of Best Instrument, Inc., of the 30 individuals, six were considered experts. They had been with the company for over 10 years and had learned their skills in an apprenticeship program. 2. Identification of the desired outcomes and cognitive tasks. The term "task" (or "process") is defined as a high-level activity that is independent of the data/information/knowledge used. Naturally, the

250


data/information/knowledge used in the task needs to be eventually included, but initially the focus is on determining the tasks and desirable outcomes. The number of tasks (meta-processes) usually identified for a major, high-level activity (e.g., the production process) ranges between 6 and 12. An organization may have several high-level activities. Thus, generally, an organization has 30-40 tasks and subtasks that reflect its entire operation. Further, tasks can and do have subtask structures, and specific linkages between tasks. Tasks can be evaluated in terms of duration, cost and value. Desired outcomes can be delineated by level of abstraction, each level supporting the goal above it. For instance, one desired outcome identified by the organization for the entire fabrication process (the highest level in this example) was "production will increase by 30% by the end of the year." A more specific desired outcome for the fabrication of instrument #12 was "a 25% decrease in error tolerance defects" which, when achieved, would contribute to the production increase.

Table 13-1. List of Identified Tasks. 1. Determine level of difficulty associated with fabrication. 2. Identify constraints associated with specific instrument configuration. 3. Decide on optimal processes (e.g., stamping) needed to fabricate instrument, based on results of #1 and #2. 4. Select and set up appropriate tools and equipment needed to fabricate instrument. 5. Fabricate instrument. 6. Apply quality control measurements and evaluate results of quality control measurements. After the preliminary set of high level outcomes was established the tasks were identified. The tasks identified (Table 13-1) are at a relatively high level. The notion of "task" exists at all levels of abstraction. For instance, an organization may have four major tasks at the highest level of abstraction, with a series of tasks and subtasks "nested" underneath each. One can choose the level of abstraction most useful to model a specific activity. The first task performed by the fabricators was "to classify the various instrument #12 configurations with their associated requirements, into one of four categories, based on an estimate of the level of difficulty they expected to encounter during fabrication" (Table 13-2). The four categories included: "very


251

difficult to fabricate," "difficult to fabricate," "moderately difficult to fabricate," and "easy to fabricate." The desired outcome of this first task was a clear and accurate understanding of the effort, time and skills required to fabricate each configuration version. This understanding was essential as a first step in achieving the desired result of "a 25% decrease in error tolerance defects." As one might expect, the experts' classifications regarding level of difficulty were significantly more accurate than those of the nonexperts.

Table 13-2. Task Description. Output a) List of all instrument characteristics (with a) Classification of instrument configuration appropriate values) that can impact fabrication into one of four categories: level of difficulty * "very difficult to fabricate" *corner radius [.0017 - .0086 centimeters] *"moderately difficult to fabricate" * type of material [aluminum, kevlar, titanium] * "difficult to fabricate" *"easy to fabricate" *sensing mechanism [vibration, temperature] *environmental [operating temperature range] *reliability requirements [high, medium, lows]

Operations a) Criteria and rules for placing an instrument configuration into a "level of difficulty" category * if type of material = kevlar, and reliability requirements = high, then "difficult to fabricate" * if sensing mechanism= vibration, then "difficult to fabricate" b)Weights for combinations of values * type of material * kevlar = .07 when associated with reliability = high = .02 when not in combination = .04 when associated with reliability - low

The second task of the fabricators was to identify, weigh and rank (according to some criteria) the pertinent instrument-specific constraints that were not related to level of difficulty (e.g., presence of hazardous fluid, cost constraints). The desired outcome of this task was a complete, ordered and weighted list of constraints for each instrument #12 configuration. The complete set of tasks identified for this work unit is shown in Table 13-1. Once the tasks had been identified, they were evaluated in terms of the extent to which they contributed to desired outcomes.

252


3. Identification ofthe problem-solving template used for each task Using guidelines provided by the cognitive modeling approach, the underlying template for each task was identified. The template acts as a kind of knowledge acquisition tool, which predicts the kind of data/information that will be needed, when it is used, and how it is used. The location/source of the data/information needed for the task is then determined. For instance, the first task identified above is based on a modified classification template (see Figure 13-2). This template indicates the way people classify things, and it serves as a guide for eliciting the data/information required for the task. Each fabricator involved in task #1 used essentially the same problem-solving template. However, the experts used considerably more data/information than less expert individuals. For example, experts used approximately 20 instrument characteristics to predict the fabrication difficulty, while nonexperts used approximately 10 instrument characteristics. Seven of these 10 characteristics were also used by experts. Thus, it was possible to not only identify the rectangles within the template where experts had more data/information available to them, but also where experts used different data/information. What is the importance of such a distinction? The expert engineers distinguished between external environment characteristics and internal instrument specific characteristics. The novice engineers showed no such differentiation, however. In ensuing discussions, the importance of distinguishing external from internal characteristics was explicitly affirmed because external characteristics eventually affected internal characteristics. Therefore, the expert envisioned two separate sets of characteristics. In addition, it was found that experts sometimes used inferences (the ovals) that differed from the inferences used by less expert individuals. Moreover, the inferences used by the less experienced fabricators often resulted in errors and quality control problems. For instance, an expert might use an inference called "match," whereas a nonexpert use an inference called "select." These two inferences act differently on identical data, creating different results. It is interesting to track the effect that such a difference causes. Although the immediate effect may be minor, by the end of the task, it has usually caused a major deviation from the expected and desired result. The act of identifying and modeling the fabrication tasks may seem relatively straightforward, however, the fabricators were not always consciously aware of the data/information they used, nor could they accurately


253

identify all the tasks in which they were involved. For instance, they could not readily describe their criteria for deciding on a level of difficulty. Hence the emphasis on specific techniques for eliciting such "compiled" knowledge.

Figure 13-2. Classification·· Problem-Solving Template. Instrument Drawings

aractensttc Identification Criteria

Abstraction Criteria

nstrument Characteristics and Values

Extraction Criteria

Level of Difficulty Criteria & Algorithms

Level of Difficulty Assignments

4. Identification and modeling ofthe data, infonnation and knowledge needed to achieve the desired results of the task. Once the tasks and problem-solving templates have been identified, the activity of identifying the data/information required by the template begins. Along with their appropriate values, each concept (e.g., "fire risk") of the

254


data/information used in the task is assigned to a particular role (rectangle) within a problem-solving template (see Figure 13-2). Examples of data and information from the problem-solving template of task #1 include such characteristics of instruments as: • Corner radius measurements • Type of material • Error tolerance specification • Setting of holes measurements • Subframe recalibration rates These pieces of data and information were identified as important characteristics of instruments, where the values of each characteristic serve as determinants of the expected level of difficulty. Examples of knowledge from the task #1 problem-solving template include: • The reasons why a specific instrument characteristic and its values are used to evaluate the level of difficulty; • The criteria governing placement of the instrument into a particular category (e.g., if comer radius ranges from 0078 to .0037, then instrument belongs to "very difficult to fabricate" category); and • The criteria used to address the interdependencies between characteristics (e.g., if comer radius >.0023 overall length of instrument iW:J 11 - 20 tt:1'1'}:':'\{:::::::=:::':':t/d 6- 10

kH:

d2-5 1

Bracketing When we are interested in obtaining overviews of the skills available in a large group of individuals, we typically need to group several individuals with similar skill mixes into a single bracket. For example, Person #1 may be a Master in Skill 3 and Expert in Skills 4 and 5. Person #2 may also be Master in Skill 3, and in addition Expert in Skills 1, 2, and 6. For general overview, these two persons may be considered to fall into the same bracket as long as Skills 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 are not the critical skills of interest.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

317

Lessons-Learned and Knowledge Inventories

Visualization Using Polar Diagrams The example in Figure 15-2 illustrates the use of the knowledge profiles to visualize the expertise available in several skill areas and the number of individuals with similar skills who are grouped into a skill bracket. This approach has the advantage that one can display the bracket expertise in many skill areas at the same time. As a result, one can compare which skill areas are strong and which are weak. If, however, much more than six brackets are shown in the same diagram, it becomes difficult to interpret.

Visualization Using Proportional Icons Proportional icons can be used to aid visualization as shown in Figure 15-3. In this example the height (and breadth) of the icon is proportional to the number of people in the skill group. The levels of expertise of the individuals in the group are indicated by different shades as shown. Colors, however, are more useful. One may also choose to vary the width of the icons, perhaps as functions of the breadth of expertise in the group. Figure 15-3. Example of Proportional Icon Display. 100%

80%

World Class Expertise

60%

High Expertise

100% 80%

40%

Very Useful Expertise

60%

20%

IL:__.:.::>__.:.·,...,__.:.··:.__-'---'.JI

~~::r~:~y Useful

0%

0%

Mechanical

Chemical

Engineers

Engineers 57

32

Useful Expertise

20%

40%

I

IExpertise

L .- - - - - - - ' ·

Neglig~ble


318


Visualization Using "Indicator Faces" We can demonstrate the use of "indicator faces" by showing how this works for three factors, each with three categories (see Figure 15-4). The 27 indicator faces that correspond to each condition are constructed by combining these features as illustrated in Figure15-5. In general, it takes a few minutes and several analysis situations to become familiar with the faces and the features which correspond to the factors.l Further, considerable analysis is required to specify what constitutes strengths and weaknesses for different perspectives and questions to be asked. When these specifications are completed, the automated analysis also requires a fair amount of calculation before the display can be provided for visualization. After the different questions have been identified, one may wish to explore which of the above -- or other -- visualization approaches are appropriate to provide the best insights and concept formation. Figure 15-4. Feature Sets for Three Factor "Indicator Faces."

oe 0tj oe Geo

Factor 1

Factor 2

Good Average Bad

Factor 3

1 Gross & Koch (1995) provide an informative and illustrative presentation of using high resolution graphics to express complex information using multiple facial features.

319

Lessons-Learned and Knowledge Inventories

Figure 15-5. Indicator "Faces" for Three Factors with Three Categories: Good, Average, and Bad

~God~O.O

e

Good Good Average

~Good Bad

e

~··-"""""""

e

~verage Good Bad

~

Good Average Average

Average Good Average

e

~ ·~Good

Good

' @ B a d Good Average

~ad Good Bad

A-A•"""' G.od

~ ...............

Average Average Average

~ Bad Average Average

~Average Bad

~verage Average Bad

~ad Average Bad

~O.OBK-

~A-&dGood

~&d&dG.od

@Average Bad Average

© B a d Bad Average

~ Good Bad Average

~Bad Bad

~verage Bad Bad

~ad Bad Bad


Chapter

16

Knowledge Com.m.unication Some Aspects of Learning Processes1 When knowledge is shared, exchanged, or transferred through teaching, it IS typically broken down into information to be communicated from the originator to a recipient. When we consider KM improvements, KPs are often concerned with how to capture and restructure knowledge and how best to communicate it to where it is needed. In this chapter, we will review some of what we know about learning processes and different types of communication.

Five Stages ofLearning Researchers have established that our learning progresses through five distinct stages when we encounter new material: Stage 1. Perception and comprehension of the knowledge Stage 2. Maintenance of the knowledge in working memory until long-term registration occurs Stage 3. Registration of the knowledge in long-term storage Stage 4. Maintenance of the knowledge in long-term storage Stage 5. Retrieval of knowledge from storage when the information is needed

Seven Basic Learning Strategies A number of basic types of learning strategies have been proposed, many of them closely related to the different types of reasoning that we engage in.2 Two basic learning strategies involve quite straightforward learning: 1. Rote learning or direct implanting of knowledge is an extreme case, where the learner accepts the knowledge supplied without examination, 1 This section is adapted from Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993). The interested reader should refer to that material for additional detail and discussion. 2 A discussion of reasoning strategies is provided in Wiig (1993).

322


judgment, or questioning. Accepted directly, rote learning includes direct memorization of provided facts or concepts. Thus, in direct "implanting learning," knowledge is "copied" straight into memory without modification or extension. Rote learning is used in training (in contrast to "education"). As such, it pertains particularly to communication of pragmatic and automatic knowledge. 2. Learning by instruction (Learning by being told) takes place when a teacher or other source of organized knowledge provides material to the learner, who then selects the most relevant facts or transforms the presented knowledge into more useful forms. Learning by instruction is also often used to train rather than educate. For example, a learner may be presented with basic facts of how to maintain a particular machine and then translates that information into a personal frame of reference. "Learning by instruction" pertains particularly to communication of pragmatic and automatic knowledge. More powerful learning strategies are based on analysis of the presented material or situations; hence, learning results from considering the analysis results to provide new knowledge. These strategies are particularly useful for education, to communicating idealistic and systematic knowledge. Some of these strategies: 3. Learning by deduction is a complex process where the communicated material implicitly contains the subject knowledge. That is, the learner deduces knowledge from the presented material. A simple example of deduction learning is when a person is presented with a factual declaration that expenses exceeded income in the last quarter and then deduces as new knowledge that the corporation operated with a negative cashflow during the period. 4. Learning by induction is a strategy, where the learner acquires knowledge by drawing inductive inferences from the supplied material. An example of induction learning is when one infers and accepts as new knowledge that a particular competitor's strategy is to reduce prices sharply to win bids in competitive situations, after having been presented with information indicating that in the last two cases he slashed prices when faced with competitive bids. 5. Learning by analogy makes the learner create new knowledge by modifying specifics of a previously known concept to match the presented material. Learning by analogy is considered to be a combination of deductive and inductive learning. For example, if the learner knows the concept of "bank loan," s/he can learn the concept of "mortgage" by noting the similarities and differences between the two by (a) using inductive inference to determine general characteristics and common features; and (b) using deductive inference to

Considerations for Knowledge Communication

323

identify the expected characteristics of the new concept "mortgage." 6. Learning from examples takes place when a learner induces a new concept by generalizing from provided examples, and possibly counterexamples. Learning from examples is one kind of learning by induction. In particular, it often involves application of case-based reasoning. An example of learning from examples is when an expert shows a loan application to an apprentice, commenting: "This is an example of a sound loan prospect with a good track record, good management, and strong market. Note how it differs from the start-up company we looked at yesterday, which has a good management team but no established market and operating history." 7. Learning by observation and discovery (unsupervised learning) occurs when a learner analyzes observed or presented entities in the provided material and determines that some can be classified into a preexisting or a new organizational or representational structure, which can characterize or even explain the material. Learning by observation and discovery is another kind of learning by induction. It can employ substrategies like clustering or descriptive generalization. An example of clustering is when a learner observes that the material represents a new variant of life insurance policy and immediately classifies the new policy in her general concept hierarchy for policies with all their characteristics and special conditions. An example of descriptive generalization is when a learner observes that several customers prefer to be supplied with products before noon and, subsequently, infers as new knowledge that "most prefer to be resupplied in the morning."

A Model for Effective Teaching1 Given a desire to transfer knowledge effectively and quickly, modern educators often rely upon effective teaching models to develop their educational programs. One model is based on the understanding that top-down learning provides understanding of underlying principles in the form of schema, which can be detailed and made more concrete, first as scripts and later as routines. Simultaneously, the model is also based on bottom-up learning where specific instances are observed, internalized, and aggregated to form reliable mental models for how to deal with situations, both in the form of routines and 1 This section is adapted from Knowledge Management Foundations (Wiig, 1993). The interested reader should refer to that material for additional detail and discussion.

324


generalized to form scripts and broader schemas. The teaching model is also based on the notion of how knowledge is held at the different conceptual levels: goal-setting (idealistic); systematic; pragmatic; and automatic knowledge. Figure 16-1 presents a graphical illustration of the teaching model, with examples of which level of abstraction may be taught and indications of which cognitive levels that may be emphasized. This illustration presents the general structure -- the schema -- of the teaching method. Its major points are as follows: 1. The teaching process starts by introducing a practical example. The emphasis is on providing understanding of where and why it is valuable to know about the subject matter, and what its ideal characteristics are. 2. The next step is to introduce a more general case -- a script -- to provide an appreciation that there is a broader domain and to indicate some of its characteristics. 3. After introducing the script, understanding is expanded by providing further abstraction and generalization in the form of a beginning schema to introduce general characteristics. 4. After a first pass from a specific example to the very general, a very different example -- yet congruent with the presented schema -- is introduced. The emphasis shifts back to imparting more concrete knowledge. 5. A routine approach -- based on the last example -- is now introduced to characterize how to handle a complete situation. Up to this point, it is often that relatively isolated aspects of the domain have been treated. The routine, therefore, is a model for how to handle a complete situation. Emphasis is almost exclusively on pragmatic knowledge. 6. The routine is expanded by treating different variants of its characteristics to create a corresponding script and by introducing illustrative examples of instances that follow the script. Emphasis is on the systematic knowledge that underlies the script and on the rules and pragmatic knowledge that are used to work with it. 7. From the new script, the basic schema is defined in greater detail to a "40%" schema with emphasis on systematic knowledge. 8. A new script is created to show how the expanded schema leads to another script which may be similar to the prior script. Emphasis is shared between systematic and pragmatic knowledge. 9. The foundation has now been laid for presenting more detailed knowledge. Several routines are presented and illustrative examples are provided. Students are provided with repeated exposure to the material to enable them to internalize it -- so they can use knowledge about the domain easily and automatically.

Considerations for Knowledge Communication

325

Figure 16-1. An Example of the Effective Teaching ModeL Level of Abstraction

Beginning Schema to Introduce General Characteristics

"40%" Schema

"80%" Schema

Final Schema

Schema

Script

Script to Form 2 Understanding of Broader Domain

Routine

Instance (Event) Example to Set Stage

Illustrative Examples

Start

Evolution OverTime

Conceptual Level Goal Setting (Idealistic) Knowledge Systematic Knowledge Pragmatic Knowledge Automatic Knowledge

•••••••• ••••••••••••••••••• 12345678

9

9

10

10 11

•

12

13

13

Ql9

14

14 15

••

••••••••••••••••••• oooooooo••••••••••• Start

Legend-- Degree of emphasis: None:Q

Evolution Over Time Slight:t/Phone

I

P•rtinent Reason for Participating

What Is That Expertise: Who Knows Most about the Lessons-Learned: Name

Position

Dent/Phone

I

r.ai Are Special A!moots Known By Person?

Where Is Additional Information Available:

Appendix A4: Lessons Learned Worksheets

6. Codification of Lesson Leanled Lesson-Learned Reference #:_ _ __

Date: I ,199

PreparedBy:

Was Lesson Codified?

Yes:[

Which knowledge representation method was used to codify knowledge? Written as free-form narrative:

[ ]

Written as report or article:

[ ]

Written as narrative in structured form:

[ ]

Encoded in preformatted database:

[ ]

Encoded in formal knowledge base:

[ ]

Encoded as knowledge-based system:

[ ]

Documented as computer-based training:

[ ]

Other:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [ ] Describe the codified knowledge:

Where is codified knowledge available?

What detailed material is available?

No:[ ]


Appendix A5. Knowledge Inventory System Worksheets ExperiencelnputFonn 1 A. Experience Input Form (Short Version) 1B

Experience Input Form (Long Version)

2.

Worksheet for the Nine Proficiency Areas for Personnel Evaluation

430


1 A. Experience Input Form (Short Version) (Complete One Sheet for Each Situation) Employee N a m e : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Empl. No.:._ _ _ _Date: I ,199_

Organization·· Position- Project Start Date: I , 199_ Organization: Division: Location: Position: Project:

End Date: I , 199_ Duration: _Years and_ Months _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Code: _ _ __

Experience and Proficiency·· 1 Start Date: I , 19_ End Date: I , 19_ 1. Professional Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.1 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2. General Products and Related Areas: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3. Specific Technologies: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.1 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4. Responsibility Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [

Duration: _ Years and _ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ]

Months Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code:_ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code:_ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: Master [ ] Grand Master [

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

Experience and Proficiency·· 2 Start Date: I , 19_ End Date: I , 19_ 1. Professional Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.1 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2. General Products and Related .Areas: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3. Specific Technologies: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.1 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4. Responsibility Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [

Duration: _ Years and _ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ]

Months Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ Master [ ] Grand Master [

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

Appendix.A5: Knowledge Inventory System Worksheets

431

1 B. Experience Input Form (Long Version) (Complete One Sheet for Each Situation)

Employee Name:_____....,...-___,,.--...,..----- Empl. No .._·_ _ _ _ Date: 1 ,199_

Organization -- Position -- Project Start Date: I , 19_ Organization: Division: Location: Position: Project:

End Date: I , 19_

Duration:

Years and

Months Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __ Code: _ _ __

Experience and Proficiency Start Date: I , 19_ End Date: I , 19_ 1. Professional Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.1 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.2 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.3 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 1.4 Professional Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2. General Products and Related Areas: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.2 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.3 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 2.4 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3. Specific Technologies: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.1 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.2 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.3 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 3.4 Subtechnology: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4. Responsibility Area: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4.1 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4.2 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ J Apprentice [ 4.3 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [ 4.4 Subarea: Proficiency: Beginner [ ] Novice [ ] Apprentice [

Duration:

Years and

] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [

J Expert [

] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [

J Journeyman [ J Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [ ] Journeyman [ ] Expert [

Months Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ J Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [ Code: _ _ __ ] Master [ ] Grand Master [

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

432


2. Worksheet for the Nine Proficiency Areas for Personnel EvaluationI Employee·

Evaluated by·

Date· _/

'

199

1. Proficiency in 2. Proficiency in 3. Proficiency in Application of Primary Professional Area Adjacent & Supporting Professional Knowledge Professional Areas 1. Practicality of solutions 1. Knowledge of overall 1. Practical knowledge of provided professional area adjacent prof. areas B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 2. lnnovativeness of solutions 2. Knowledge of theory 2. Theoretical understanding of provided adjacent pro£ areas B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 3. Knowledge of "what does 3. Knowledge of analysis 3. Knowledge of sources of not work" methodologies adjacent prof. experts B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 4. Knowledge of "what is 4. Knowledge of synthesis 4. Expertise in integrating methods adjacent w. primary area needed to make it work" B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 5. Expertise in use of support 5. Knowledge of standard 5. Know what customer tools & functions "should want" professional solutions B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 6. Understanding of support 6. Know-how to satisfy 6. Knowledge of theoretical tool & functions nature customer limits & constraints B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 7. Knowledge of sources of 7. Proficiency-- trouble 7. Expertise in achieving peer support assistance shooting acceptance B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 8. Capability to deliver on time 8. Expertise in delivering what 8. Understanding of universe of adjacent areas is expected B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G Total: B A C p E M G Total: B A c P EM G Total: B A C PEMG

1

B: Beginner (Starter );

C: Competent Performer (Understanding ); E: Expert;

A: Advanced Beginner (Aware ); P: Proficient Performer; M: Master; G: Grand Master

Appendix .A5: Knowledge Inventory System Worksheets

433

2. Worksheet for the Nine Proficiency Areas for Personnel Evaluation (cont.) Employee: - - - - - - - - - Evaluated by: - - - - - Date: _/_, 199_

4. Proficiency in Job Function and Company Matters 1. Knowledge of job requirements B A c p E M G 2. Knowledge of how job fits with other functions B A c p E M G 3. Knowledge of company products B A c p E M G 4. Knowledge of customers & suppliers B A c p E M G 5. Knowledge of company's business B A c p E M G 6. Knowledge of company practices & procedures B A c p E M G 7. Knowledge of company personnel & networking B A c p E M G 8. Knowledge of company traditions & history B A c p E M G Total: B A C P E M G

5. Proficiency in World Matters and Broad Perspectives 1. Knowledge of general social & economic issues B A c p E M G 2. Knowledge of geography & world conditions B A c p E M G 3. Understanding of business and market forces B A c p E M G 4. Knowledge of hobbies & leisure activities B A c p E M G 5. Knowledge of literature, arts, religion, philosophy B A c p E M G 6. Understanding of physical, mental, social health B A c p E M G 7. Understanding of personal & social behaviors B A c p E M G 8. Expertise in viewing situations from many sides B A c p E M G Total: B ACPEMG

6. Proficiency in Conceptualizing and Abstracting 1. Expertise in abstracting complex operations B A c p E M G 2. Expertise in systematizing operations B A c p E M G 3. Understan~ing of systems sctence B A c p E M G 4. Expertise in applying good judgment B A c p E M G 5. Expertise in opportunities for new ways B A c p E M G 6. Expertise in generating visionary perspectives B A c p E M G 7. Understanding of cognitive & knowledge sciences B A c p E M G 8. Knowledge of knowledge & its organization A c p E M G B Total: B A C P E M G

434


2. Worksheet for the Nine Proficiency Areas for Personnel Evaluation (cont.) Employee: - - - - - - - - - Evaluated by: - - - - - Date: _!_, 199_

7. Proficiency in Leadership and Facilitation 1. Expertise in leading meetings B A c p E M G 2. Expertise in motivating people B A c p E M G 3. Expertise in explaining what is required B A c p E M G 4. Administrative & managerial Expertise B A c p E M G 5. Expertise in general leadership B A c p E M G 6. Expertise in planning

8. Proficiency in 9. Proficiency in Entrepreneurship, Communication and Ne2otiations, and Sales Human Expertise 1. Expertise in generating 1. Expertise in easy & clear innovative solutions communications B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 2. Expertise in Know ledge of 2. Expertise in group & explaining benefits communication & control B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 3. Understanding of "the other 3. Understanding of what is side" required B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 4. Expertise in positive dialog 4. Ability to teach & transfer under adversity expertise B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 5. Expertise in operating under 5. Expertise in ethical conduct uncertainty B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 6. Expertise in persuasion 6. Expertise in befriending & creating trust B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G 7. Expertise in easing relations 7. Cooperation w. 7. Expertise in mustering personal energy between people organization's objectives p p A E M B A c E M B c p E M G B A c G G 8. Expertise in self-starting 8. Expertise in presenting 8. Expertise in perseverance & positive attitude achieving closure B A c p E M G B A c p E M G B A c p E M G p E MG p E M G Total: B A Total: B A P EM G Total: B A

c

c

c

-----------------------

Appendix A6. Knowledge-Transfer Criteria Worksheets 1.

Criteria for Evaluating Knowledge

2.

Criteria for Evaluating Knowledge-Transfer Modes


1. Criteria for Evaluating Knowledge • Importance --How important is the knowledge? What is the expected value-added from correct use? Conversely, what are expected losses from incorrect uses?: []Very high []High [] Substantial []Noticeable [] $10,000 or more [] $1,000 [] $100 [] $10

[]Low [] $1

• Importance-- How important is it that the knowledge be used correctly?: []Absolutely important []Very important []Important

[]Somewhat important []It is "nice"

• Frequency of Knowledge Use-- How often is the knowledge used? What is the frequency of knowledge use? How frequently is it accessed, or will it be, in typical situations?: []Rarely []Weekly []Daily [] Hourly []"All the time"

• Predominant Nature of Knowledge-- Which knowledge types does it represent?: [ ] Factual knowI.

[ ] Conceptual knowI. [ ] Expectational knowI. [ ] Methodological knowI.

• How Knowledge Is Held -- How is the knowledge to be held to facilitate use? What are the conceptual knowledge levels?: [ ] Goal-Setting/Idealistic [ ] Systematic [ ] Pragmatic

[ ] Automatic

• Potential Knowledge Representation Models -- Which potential knowledge representation models might be used at PoA? In which forms should we hold the knowledge?: []Verbal narration []Written text free form []Structured written text [ ] Demonstration videos [ ] Math. models [ ] Graphics [ ] Formatted tables [ ] Other []Other []Reference cases []Production rules []Objects []Neural Net [] [ ] Crisp logic [ ] Fuzzy logic [ ] Deterministic [ ] Uncertainty

• Volatility-- How fast and frequently does the knowledge change?: [ ] Almost never [ ] Annually []Scheduled by calendar []Days advance notice [] Not needed immediately after change

[ ] Monthly [ ] Daily []Weeks advance notice []No advance notice [] Needed immediately

[ ] Very frequently

• Extent of Changes -- What are the extent of changes? How large a portion of the knowledge segment is likely to change each time?: [ ] Minute changes [ ] Small changes [ ] Significant changes []No structure change []Some structure change [ ] Significant structure change [ ] Total redesign

[ ] Large changes

• Nature of Knowledge Use -- What is the nature of knowledge use? Which categories describe how knowledge will be used? How does knowledge use relate to basic decisionmaking, problem-solving, or reasoning functions?: [] For real-time planning [ ] Reactively -- on-the-fly [] [ ] To direct dialog [ ] To interpret

• Institutional Requirements-- What are the institutional requirements? Is the knowledge required as external or other policies?: [ ] Not required [ ] License requirements [ ] Internal policy [ ] Other

[ ] Industry conventions

Appendix A6: Knowledge Transfer Criteria Worksheets

437

2. Criteria for Evaluating Knowledge-Transfer Modes • Scheduling -- How convenient is it to schedule recipient participation in transfer program?: [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Less than desired [ ] Poor []Not applicable []Real-time []Time shifted []When convenient [] Scheduled presence • Program Durations-- What is the overall duration of the complete transfer program?: [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Less than desired [ ] Poor []Not applicable []Always present []Real-time []Time shifted []When convenient • Session Durations -- How long is each session in a multiple-session program?: [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Less than desired [ ] Poor []Brief (

Knowledge Management Methods

Knowledge Management Methods

Suggest Documents

Combining IS Research Methods - Global Knowledge Management

Knowledge on Nonpharmacological Methods of Pain Management

Methods and Tools for Corporate Knowledge Management

Knowledge Management - National Collaborating Centre for Methods ...

Knowledge Management - National Collaborating Centre for Methods ...

Management knowledge and knowledge

Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management ... - CiteSeerX

Knowledge Management or the Management of Knowledge?

Knowledge management and knowledge management systems - Insead

Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems

knowledge management

knowledge management

Knowledge Management

Knowledge Management

Knowledge management has been defined as "the methods and tools ...

Methods and Tools for Knowledge Management in Research Centres [PDF]

A review of knowledge management methods and ... - CiteSeerX

Methods and tools for Knowledge Management in research centres

knowledge management and knowledge - Insead

knowledge management and knowledge - insead

Experience management in knowledge management

Experience management in knowledge management

Knowledge Discovery Methods - CEUR-WS.org

Knowledge of FP Methods - Data.unhcr.org