Introduction

Knowledge management is the name given to the set of systematic and

disciplined actions that an organization can take to obtain the greatest
value from the knowledge available to it. “Knowledge” in this context
includes both the experience and understanding of the people in the
organization and the information artefacts such as documents and reports,
available within the organization and in the world outside. Effective
knowledge management typically requires an appropriate combination of
organizational, social and managerial initiatives along with, in many cases,
deployment of appropriate technology. It is the technology and its
applicability

Many enterprises downsize to adapt to more competitive environments,

but unless they have captured the knowledge of their employees,
downsizing can result in a loss of critical information. Similarly, as
employees leave, organizations are likely to lose access to large quantities
of critical knowledge. As companies expand internationally, geographic
barriers can affect knowledge exchange and prevent easy access to
information. These and other forces are pushing enterprises to explore
better methods for knowledge management. Enterprise knowledge
management entails formally managing knowledge resources, typically by
using advanced information technology.

Page | 1
KM is formal in that knowledge is classified and categorized according to a
pre specified, but evolving, ontology into structured and semi structured
data and knowledge bases. The overriding purpose of enterprise KM is to
make knowledge accessible and reusable to the enterprise. The business
world is becoming so concerned about knowledge management that,
according to one report, over 40 percent of the Fortune 1000 now have a
chief knowledge officer, a senior-level executive responsible for creating an
infrastructure and cultural environment for knowledge sharing.

Page | 2
 Knowledge Management
Knowledge management is a very personal activity that, if practiced widely,
can improve organization’s ability to achieve development results.
Knowledge management means taking responsibility for what you know,
who you know—and what they know. Knowledge management begins and
ends as a personal activity. Without the human understanding, personal
context and need for immediate utility which we bring to bear on
knowledge, all we have is raw data. Personally accessible, immediately
useful and relatively inexpensive personal knowledge management tools
can empower development workers to take ownership of their intellectual
assets. Knowledge management starts with the individual and moves
through an organization. Every individual uses knowledge management
tools – including personal memory, date books, notebooks, file cabinets,
email archives, calendars, post-it notes, bulletin boards, newsletters,
journals, and restaurant napkins.

Knowledge management begins when an organization enables individuals

to link their personal knowledge management systems with organizational
knowledge management systems. Knowledge management tools only work
when individuals see direct benefits in linking their personal knowledge
management systems with organizational knowledge management
systems.

Page | 3
If development workers believe that the chores of contributing to an
organizational knowledge management program benefit only their bosses,
and not themselves or the communities with which they work, they may
decide the best way to take advantage of the value of their individual
knowledge is to use it for personal or local advantage. This results in
serious knowledge deficits for the wider organization.

At the individual level, knowledge management involves a range of

relatively simple and inexpensive techniques and tools that anyone can use
to acquire, create and share knowledge, extend personal networks and
collaborate with colleagues without having to rely on the technical or
financial resources of the organization. Implemented from the bottom up
by one development worker at a time, these techniques can increase
productivity and enthusiasm and help to build momentum that can
overcome the technological and social barriers to top-down, organization-
wide knowledge management initiatives.

Page | 4
 History of Knowledge
Management
In past eras, most employees had to fit into their organizational structures
by means of performance standards based upon strictly defined job
descriptions. Employment was secure as long as they performed assigned
tasks and minded their own business. Out-of-the-box thinking was not likely
and knowledge hoarding was the order of the day.

During the era of business process reengineering, cost accountants saw the
most knowledgeable workers as an unnecessary expense, a liability to be
eliminated through downsizing or early retirement.  Many organizations
made the strategic mistake of pushing their intellectual assets out the
door.  Knowledge hoarding was then replaced by a culture of knowledge
hiding.

In the past, consultancies practiced knowledge management on the fly.

International networks of consultants communicated through computer
networks by sharing their own problem-solving expertise with other
consultants whose clients had the same problems. But consultants are in
the business of selling their own knowledge and had little inclination to
share it, especially with their colleagues and peers.

During the 1990s chief executives in the consulting trades realized that the
foundation of our economy had been shifting from natural resources
towards intellectual assets.  They began evaluating how knowledge was

Page | 5
being used in their organizations.  The biggest shock came with the
discovery that 80 percent of corporate knowledge assets were not owned
by the companies.  They went home every night with the employees.  As a
result, questions such as how knowledge is acquired, used and delivered
became paramount. 

These early pioneers knew that their organizations had to adapt quickly.
They spent their time rethinking what they were doing, how they were
doing it and why. They tore down barriers and ancient processes and
replaced them with a systematic approach to knowledge sharing based on
the fluid dynamics of a networked economy.

As CEOs evaluated their knowledge management dynamics, it became

apparent that the people who drove their enterprises were those who were
creating and accumulating knowledge.  And as time went on, the value of
these people and what they knew was exerting an increasing influence on
the success of their organizations.  The challenge then became how to
create the information, organizational intelligence, business models,
communication tools and learning systems around these extremely
important people.  This goal had to become a central mission, a basic
purpose for the existence of these consulting organizations – if they were to
be successful.

The lessons learned by these early adopters of knowledge management

indicated that though they knew what knowledge was, finding out who has
it, reorganizing operations to nourish and manage it, changing the work

Page | 6
culture to support it and building knowledge networks around it were the
real challenges of the future.

With the advent of networked resources, new ways to codify, share, store
and deliver knowledge enabled organizations to strategically use critical
knowledge more easily and cheaply.  The challenge, however, became how
to develop a successful knowledge management model - there were too
few examples from which to work.  The result was a new knowledge
management industry that was born out of the few models that were
developed in those early days.  Today, a group of leading edge companies
like Lotus, Open Text, Document and others have developed knowledge
management tools that enable corporations to manage and deliver
strategic knowledge.  It is no longer necessary to reinvent the wheel, and
since many of the tools available were created for management consulting
firms, it is possible to select and integrate a full-featured Knowledge
Management System that includes and integrates key components like
document management and collaborative software. 

Page | 7
Knowledge Management System

Knowledge Management Approach

Page | 8
Difference between Knowledge
and Information Management

Page | 9
Most managers of knowledge initiatives concede their organizations lack a
clear, widely-shared understanding of what knowledge is and how it can be
distinguished from information. A consensus view is that, while information
is defined as a flow of messages, knowledge is the combining of information
and context in a way that makes it actionable. In reality, most projects we
studied are a mixture of knowledge and information management. But
knowledge management projects have several characteristics that
differentiate them from traditional information management or
information systems projects.
Whether they defined the content of their initiatives as knowledge,
information, or a mixture of both, the managers of the initiatives we
studied have one characteristic in common. They are constantly trying to
add more value to the content they provide, i.e. to transform it from
information into knowledge. They do this through a variety of means,
including filtering the content for timeliness and relevance, adding context
and comparisons, and grouping important information into lists and
frameworks. These efforts to add value are more important to knowledge
initiatives than dwelling on whether it is knowledge, information, or
something else that is being managed.

Distinguish between characteristics

Page | 10
Knowledge Management Information Management
Project Project
 Goals emphasize value-added  Goals emphasize delivery and
for users accessibility of information

 Adds value to content by  Delivers available content with little

filtering synthesizing, value added
interpreting, pruning content

 Usually requires ongoing user  Emphasis on one-way transfer of

contributions and feedback information

 Balanced focus on technology  Heavy technology focus

and culture issues in creating
impacts

Need for Knowledge Management

The following are the needs of for Knowledge Management

 Market places are increasingly competitive and the rate of innovation is

rising.

Page | 11
 Reductions in staffing create a need to replace informal knowledge with
formal methods.
 Competitive pressures reduce the size of the work force that holds
valuable business knowledge.
 The amount of time available to experience and acquire knowledge has
diminished.
 Early retirements and increasing mobility of the work force lead to loss of
knowledge.
 There is a need to manage increasing complexity as small operating
companies are trans-national sourcing operations.
 Changes in strategic direction may result in the loss of knowledge in a
specific area. Most of our work is information based.
 Organizations compete on the basis of knowledge.
 Products and services are increasingly complex, endowing them with a
significant information component.
 The need for life-long learning is an inescapable reality.

 In brief, knowledge and information have become the medium in which

business problems occur. As a result, managing knowledge represents the
primary opportunity for achieving substantial savings, significant
improvements in human performance, and competitive advantage.

Page | 12
 It’s not just a Fortune 500 business problem. Small companies need
formal approaches to knowledge management even more, because they
don’t have the market leverage, inertia, and resources that big companies
do. They have to be much more flexible, more responsive, and more
"right" (make better decisions) — because even small mistakes can be
fatal to them.

Advantages of Knowledge
Management
 Some of the advantages claimed for KM systems are:
 Sharing of valuable organizational information.
 Can avoid re-inventing the wheel, reducing redundant work.

Page | 13
 May reduce training time for new employees
 Retention of Intellectual Property after the employee leaves if such
knowledge can be codified.
 Knowledge Management System (KM System) refers to a (generally IT
based) system for managing knowledge in organizations, supporting
creation, capture, storage and dissemination of information. It can
comprise a part (neither necessary nor sufficient) of a Knowledge
Management initiative.
 The idea of a KM system is to enable employees to have ready access to
the organization's documented base of facts, sources of information, and
solutions. For example a typical claim justifying the creation of a KM
system might run something like this: an engineer could know the
metallurgical composition of an alloy that reduces sound in gear systems.
Sharing this information organization wide can lead to more effective
engine design and it could also lead to ideas for new or improved
equipment.

Sharing of valuable organizational information.

 Can avoid re-inventing the wheel, reducing redundant work.
 May reduce training time for new employees

Knowledge Management System (KM System) refers to a (generally IT based)

system for managing knowledge in organizations, supporting creation,
capture, storage and dissemination of information. It can comprise a part
(neither necessary nor sufficient) of a Knowledge Management initiative.
The idea of a KM system is to enable employees to have ready access to the
organization's documented base of facts, sources of information, and
solutions. For example a typical claim justifying the creation of a KM system

Page | 14
might run something like this: an engineer could know the metallurgical
composition of an alloy that reduces sound in gear systems. Sharing this
information organization wide can lead to more effective engine design and it
could also lead to ideas for new or improved equipment.

Examples of knowledge management:

Document based i.e. any technology that permits
creation/management/sharing of formatted documents such as Lotus Notes,
web, distributed databases etc.
Ontology/Taxonomy based: these are similar to document technologies in the
sense that a system of terminologies (i.e. ontology) are used to summarize
the document e.g. Author, Subj, Organization etc. as in DAML & other XML
based ontology.

Resources Required for Knowledge Management Projects

While some of the resources needed for a knowledge management
initiative are context specific, all the of the projects we examined had
certain elements that are necessary for success. These included: Knowledge
project sponsors and managers. As with any project involving organizational
change, these initiatives require a relatively high level management sponsor
who has budgetary control over the resources that will be needed. Finding
sponsors and keeping them committed can be one of the biggest challenges

Page | 15
for project managers because of the abstract nature of knowledge and the
difficulty many executives have in seeing a direct link to bottom line
concerns. Knowledge managers must particularly strive to avoid
intellectual arrogance; when managing knowledge we observed a tendency
to begin to feel that one knows more about the domain under management
than anyone else. This syndrome has been called, “the dark side of
knowledge management.”

New knowledge management roles. Managing knowledge projects demand

a sophisticated set of competencies that include.
 Strong interpersonal and facilitation skills to get people in diverse roles
working together;
 A hard-nosed business orientation to continually assess the project’s
value added; and
 Sufficient technical knowledge to manage the infrastructure
development.
Depending on the specific project, managing organizational knowledge can
also require new skills sets not commonly found in organizations. Editors,
reporters, analysts, group facilitators will be needed on many projects as
capacities to elicit, interpret, and synthesize information from a variety of
sources, and communicate it in ways that add value for the end user take
on added importance. Setting up the technological infrastructure.
Most of the knowledge management initiatives we found had an
information technology component. The most popular technologies
involved databases, information bases, or knowledge bases that are

Page | 16
accessed by desktop computing and communications infrastructures. For
many projects, the choice of technology to be used is influenced by higher
level organizational standards. In other cases, the project leader must make
technological choices that will influence the unit’s capacity for managing
knowledge for some time to come. A very common technical decision in
early 1996 is between Lotus Notes and Worldwide Web-based “intranets”
for knowledge capture and distribution.

Dealing with broader cultural and human issues.

While organizations often focus on technology for knowledge management,
it is more frequently cultural and human factors that differentiate successes
from failures. Perhaps the most critical cultural issues involve creating an
organizational climate in which knowledge is valued and shared. Specific
Human resource programs, e.g., performance evaluation and incentive
programs can help in this regard, though they must be consistent with the
broader culture. It may also be necessary to create some level of shared
meaning around knowledge categories.
Because of the breadth and depth of efforts necessary to make cultural
changes stick, it may be more effective to undertake them at a level higher
than that of an individual project. In fact, we believe that creating a
knowledge-oriented culture is a key responsibility of corporate-level chief
knowledge officers or chief learning officers. Money like virtually all
corporate initiatives, knowledge management projects require financial
resources. The costs go for people, technology, the logistics involved in
face-to-face knowledge creation and transfer, and in some cases the

Page | 17
purchase of external information. The costs of the projects we observed
ranged from several hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars.
Because of these costs, knowledge initiative managers should make
significant efforts to capture the benefits of their projects.

Conclusion
It’s too early to judge the success or failure of most knowledge
management projects, but pioneers in this area do provide some insights
into where firms should begin thinking about leveraging their knowledge,
and what business impacts they should expect. Firms can look to:

Page | 18
 Synthesize and distribute knowledge about the competitive environment.
 Improve operational performance by sharing existing knowledge (e.g.,
structured knowledge, lessons learned) more effectively. Make
knowledge resources and shortages more visible to facilitate use and
 Increase attention on areas of special need. Measure intellectual assets to
enhance strategic focus.
 Create more knowledge intensive products, by either adding value to
existing ones or creating entirely new revenue streams.
As the search continues in this new field, our next paper will address the
problems of implementing these initiatives in more detail, and suggest ways
Managers can tackle these emerging issues in both its expert network
business, and in complex data base searches assisted by Knowledge
analysts.
Of course, all knowledge management initiatives in commercial firms have
the Ultimate objective of making or saving money. Only a small percentage
of the projects we studied, however, have any formal measures of savings
or increased revenues. Embed Knowledge in Products and Processes.
Finally, another type of project seeks to Enhance or create new knowledge-
intensive products, services, and processes. By recognizing the potential
market value of knowledge that the firm is generating, the value of existing
offerings can be enhanced or new revenue sources created. For example,
Autodesk recognized that the engineering designs created by customers
using its product AutoCAD were source of potential design knowledge. It is
buying these designs from its customers and will re-sell them to other firms
wanting a “head start” on designs in similar areas. In another case, many

Page | 19
high technology companies are working together in the Customer Support
Consortium to capture and leverage knowledge in customer support
processes.

Knowledge Mapping
A knowledge map not only shows where knowledge resides, but also makes
evident the state of the organization’s technology, how well its processes
support knowledge sharing, and the work styles and culture of its people.

Page | 20
Knowledge mapping consists of two major tasks, each of which can be done
without the other. The first is to identify where knowledge resides, and
involves locating repositories of knowledge throughout the organization.
This effort prepares the way for creating a knowledge database.

Identifying where knowledge resides is relatively straightforward. It means

taking an inventory of what people in the organization have written down
or entered into information systems, as well as identifying sources of
information people use that come from outside (such as public or university
libraries, web sites or subscription services). Finding and organizing all that
data may be time-consuming, but it is not conceptually difficult.

The second, more intensive knowledge mapping task attempts to capture

the patterns of knowledge flow in the organization. Mapping knowledge
flow requires examines how people process and direct information, since
ultimately that determines how well an organization uses and shares its
knowledge.
Mapping where knowledge resides and mapping patterns of knowledge
flow are interdependent. Many organizations have attempted to map only
one characteristic of knowledge, and find that their efforts yield few results.
For example, if the organization looks only at where knowledge resides, it
will not gain insight on how knowledge can be better shared, distributed
and accessed.

Page | 21
Ultimately, knowledge mapping is focused on what people are doing,
thinking and feeling. The goal is to examine people’s attitudes toward and
habits concerning knowledge sharing in the organization and learn with
whom they collaborate, how they get the information they need, whether
and when they document their own knowledge, and how they store and
distribute knowledge.

Knowledge mapping often includes a written survey, facilitated group

discussions and individual interviews. These efforts should cross
departmental lines, because when all levels are involved, findings reflect
reality better because the perspectives of staff at a single level cannot skew
the overall results.

Knowledge mapping may surprise senior managers, because it may show

that they are part of the problem. For example, knowledge mapping can
uncover problems in how managers filter information as it travels down to
lower levels. Managers may assume that they are communicating
organizational goals and rationales, but knowledge mapping may reveal
that communication is nowhere near as effective as they believe.
Knowledge mapping often illustrates that without feedback from front line
staff, organizations create visible “knowledge bottlenecks” that may
otherwise go unnoticed.

Knowledge mapping may also determing whether bureaucratic processes

are designed to support knowledge sharing. Managers frequently do not

Page | 22
provide sufficient incentives or time for knowledge sharing. They may not
believe that effective knowledge capture is part of their staff’s jobs. Or,
they may ask their project team members to compile lessons learned and
best practices, but not provide them with the time to actually do so.
Knowledge mapping will help make this visible and point to bureaucratic
processes that need to change to support knowledge management.

Knowledge mapping does not guarantee a successful knowledge

management initiative, but it improves the chances that an organization
company is addressing the right problems and deploying the right resources
to address them.

Incentives for Knowledge

Management

Organizations often struggle with getting people to incorporate the

knowledge management tools and processes into a daily work routine.

Page | 23
People are typically socialized to use whatever is the traditional tool for
storing or accessing information, and when something new comes along it
can be hard for people to adapt and adopt. Technology alone cannot make
people into better knowledge managers. Knowledge management means
asking people to devote their scarce time to codifying their newly acquired
knowledge and transmitting it to others. People need to have personal and
organizational incentives and they need to be able to access training to use
new tools.

Knowledge management tools and processes ought to be interesting (and

even fun!) to use. Organizations can also include a variety of incentives:

 Job descriptions and performance evaluations that reflect the value of

knowledge management to the organization. Knowledge sharing
performance can be ranked on a scale from 1 to 5. Staff cannot earn a 4
or a 5 unless they have participated in knowledge sharing activities, such
as responding to posted questions, organizing knowledge sharing
activities, or publishing research.
 Bonuses to managers whose departments contribute the most useful
information.
 "Reputational" incentives via a "best-seller" list that publicizes the most
frequently accessed contributions to a knowledge database. The theory is
that if you are on the list, your coworkers will recognize you as an expert
on certain subjects. By becoming an acknowledged expert you are likely
to end up with better assignments (Who gets to fly to Singapore to help

Page | 24
 design the next exciting new project? Is it just someone nearby, or is it
someone who's really an expert?)
 Quantify and measure the success of a knowledge sharing program and
then publicizes the results detailing which parts of the organization have
contributed to success

Senior managers also have to be the role models so people know they are
serious about knowledge management. If they are not, people will know that
knowledge management is the latest organizational fad and they will wait
until it

Types of Knowledge Management

Projects
In our research, we found seven different types of knowledge initiatives.
Each of these is described below, along with an example of the business
context in which it appears: Capturing and reusing structured knowledge.
Leaders of these projects recognize that knowledge is often embedded in
component parts of organizational outputs, such as product designs,
project proposals and reports, documented implementation procedures,
Page | 25
and software code that can be reused to reduce the time and resources
needed to produce
a new output. For example, Skandia, a Swedish-based financial services
company, has cut its start up time for operating units in new countries from
seven years to seven months by packaging its cumulative experience into
administrative modules that enable it to reduce costs while expanding
international operations much faster. Capturing and sharing lessons learned
from practice. This type of project captures softer, more experiential
knowledge that must be interpreted and adapted by the user in a
new context. These efforts often involve sharing learning through a data
base like Lotus Notes, and they may also take on a more interpersonal
approach, using face-to-face sharing of stories and experiences. For
example, the US Army’s Centre for Lessons Learned is now at the heart of
an elaborate infrastructure developed for capturing and sharing new
knowledge gained from field operations Identifying Sources and Networks
of Expertise.
Instead of trying to capture and deploy knowledge content, some projects
are designed merely to make expertise more visible and accessible to
employees. The underlying strategy here is to facilitate connections
between those people who possess and those who need knowledge. For
example, TeleTech, a small firm based in Minneapolis, has created a
network of external experts for clients who seek technical expertise in a
specified domain.
Structuring and Mapping Knowledge Needed to Enhance Performance.
Another type of project impacts efforts like new product development or

Page | 26
process redesign by making explicit the specific knowledge needed at
particular stages of the initiative. One project at Hoffman-LaRoche created
a “knowledge map” of the new drug application process. This map made
clear what knowledge would have to be developed and packaged to answer
the questions that customers -- in this case, FDA regulators -- wanted
answered before approving a particular new drug.
Measuring and Managing the Economic Value of Knowledge. Virtually all
firms possess structured intellectual assets, such as patents, copyrights,
software licenses, and customer data bases. Recognizing that these assets
create both revenues and costs for the firm, another type of project seeks
to manage these assets more judiciously. Dow Chemical, for example, set
up an infrastructure to organize and classify its patents to determine which
ones represent strategic advantages, which present revenue opportunities
from licensing, and which patents should be abandoned to reduce the
company’s tax burden. Synthesizing and Sharing Knowledge from External
Sources.
A turbulent business environment increases the importance of
organizational intelligence systems. Traditionally, these systems have been
little more than information delivery “clipping services” that routed articles
and reports to executives. But the electronic information avalanche,
combined with increasing complexity, specialization, and the speed of
market changes has raised the knowledge component of these systems.
External intelligence systems are an easily overlooked type of knowledge
management project. Hewlett- Packard, for example, is currently
developing systems to provide marketing intelligence for both domestic and

Page | 27
international business units. These systems will require editors, reporters,
and analysts to synthesize and provide context to the tremendous volume
of
Market information available.

BUSINESS VALUE FROM KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT
1. What Is Value?

Today, much of an organization’s value is in intangibles – the value of

customer relationships, the value of the skills and knowledge of its people,
value of information in databases that has reseal potential and value from
intellectual property, such as patents. The intrinsic value of such intellectual
capital is difficult to assess. This is one reason why the accountancy
profession who like precision, continue to prepare balance sheets that do
Page | 28
little to reflect the true worth of a firm. The realizable value depends on
what others will pay. What is the value to you of a glass of water when you
are in your home vs. where you are struggling to survive in desert? It also
has a time dependency and depends on the perception of the value.

Unless your primary business is in knowledge products and services, such as

media, digital content, consultancy, the main value of knowledge is how it
contributes to your business performance and other organizational
objectives. Surveys of KM benefits show that increasing revenues, saving
costs and improving the customer experience are the main contribution of
better knowledge management. Understanding the link between
knowledge flows and such business outcomes is therefore at the heart of
demonstrating the value of knowledge and of knowledge management.

2. The Business Case for Knowledge Management

Knowledge management can be an expensive business. Investing five per

cent of operating costs is not an unusual figure for many knowledge-based
businesses. How can investments in particular KM projects that frequently
cost £5 million, £10 million or much more, be justified? There are three
main perspectives, one or more of which may be appropriate in a given
situation:

 Asset perspective: what is the intrinsic value of this information or

knowledge?
 Benefits perspective: what benefits accrue from effective utilization of
knowledge?

Page | 29
 Cost-effectiveness: what cost saving accrue from better reuse of
knowledge?

Taking the first perspective, there is a whole new field of intellectual capital
measurement that is currently evolving. This takes the various component,
such as customer capital, human capital and structural capital (that in
organizational processes, databases etc.) and intellectual property. What
financial figure you put on it depends on your purpose. You may assign a
replacement cost value or a perceived market value. There is also a risk
value – how much damage would occur to your business if this information
got into the hands of your competitors? IC accounting is not
straightforward. For example one plus one rarely equals two.

There is often more value in a well-honed team that the value attributed to
each individual. Therefore most IC methods use a range of indicators of

value and track these years on year, rather than trying to determine an
absolute financial number. Skandia insurance company is the pioneer of
such methods, but it is slowly catching on as a corporate tool in other
organizations as a focus for management attention.

The benefits perspective takes into account the benefits accrue from having
the right knowledge in the right place at the right time. Sometimes such
benefits, as finding relevant information quickly, are easily quantifiable.
More often than not, knowledge workers will say that the time saved was
not simply translated into a cost saving but used to better effect, e.g. to
Page | 30
develop a sales proposal that had a higher chance of success, or of
improving a product design. Ideally, a tool such as a benefits tree is needed
to track the cause and effect relationships. However, in most situations this
is idealistic rather than realistic.

The third perspective – and these perspectives are closely inter-related – is

that of cost effectiveness. Reusing existing knowledge means that “the
wheel” does not need to be “reinvented” elsewhere in the business and
thus costs can be saved. One example includes Chevron’s savings of over
$100 million in its energy costs through its sharing of best practices.
Another is a management consultancy that conservatively estimates that
for every productivity boost of 1% their consultants bring in more that £ 50
million in fees. And a knowledge management programme that delivers
them the information that they need quickly while working on a client
assignment delivers quite a few percentage points in productivity.

Taking these three viewpoints together, it is not too difficult to identify

many ways in which better knowledge management delivers value to the
business. What proportion of any measurable improvement in business
performance can be attributed exclusively to knowledge management, as
opposed to the many other initiatives that also probably claiming such
improvements is a moot point.

3. Some Difficulties

Page | 31
 Some of the problems of valuing the contribution of knowledge
management have already been alluded to: How is the contribution valued?
Do different people see the value as different? Which is cause, which is
effect? On investigating most organizations more closely, however, it is
found that many other investments, particular those that involve
infrastructure or are widely diffused, face similar difficulties. Take one point
in particular. Often the human capital of an organization is its most valuable
asset. But how well is the value of people measured? What is the business
loss if highly knowledgeable workers leave? There are many organizations,
especially those in the public sector, who do not accurately account for
people’s time against key business activities, projects or customers. Faced
with such imprecise baseline how we can possibly measure the impact of a
KM programme.

4. Creating Value through Knowledge Management

There are now many knowledge management case studies that

demonstrate the changes and improvements that have been brought
about. For many organizations, such activities are relatively straightforward
to emulate. However, a more solid foundation for action starts by following
this ABC:

 Assessing your baseline – knowing where you are

 Business drivers – understanding the key drivers of business value

Page | 32
 Choosing a focus – analysing where KM activities have the highest payback

There are now several knowledge management assessment tools. People in

the organization complete a questionnaire that explores many factors, such
as the handling of information, the capturing of tacit knowledge and the
readiness of the organizational culture to promote knowledge sharing.
Doing such an assessment is one way of checking progress in knowledge
management capabilities. Perhaps more important assessment is that of
the information or knowledge audit. Here the main business processes are
analyzed and key knowledge workers interviewed to identify knowledge
needs and how well they are being met. Such an audit – that need not be
comprehensive but simply representative or focusing on key tasks –
typically reveals tremendous duplication of databases and processes to
collect information as well as some critical gaps.

Business drivers varies from situation to situation, but some common ones
are increased competition, the need to save costs, a growing customer
focus, providing a more seamless service to customers, product innovation,
and in the UK public sector - eGovernment. Only if a knowledge initiative
can show how it responds to these drivers does it deserve to get funding.
Understanding these drivers will help you choose which of the knowledge
levers will have the most impact.

An analysis of some 100 KM cases showed that there are a number of

recurring levers that are the focus of KM activities. Briefly the seven levers
are:

Page | 33
 Customer knowledge – repeatedly cited in surveys as the most
important knowledge an organization needs to capture and exploit
 Knowledge-enhanced products and services – adding value by
surrounding the product with additional information, such as personal
preferences when booking travel
 Knowledge in people – a people-focussed programme that aims to
continually increase workforce skills through personal and team
development; today e-learning as a delivery vehicle is in vogue
 Organizational memory – knowing what an organization knows, over
space and time e.g. sharing best practice from one part of the world to
another; recording lessons learned that should be taken account of in
similar future situations
 Knowledge in processes – capturing the knowledge of your best
professionals and embedding their good practices into the recommended
procedures
 Knowledge in relationships – creating forums and other mechanisms
to have closer sharing of knowledge with suppliers, customer s and
partners
 Knowledge assets – the intellectual capital focus mentioned earlier.

5. Delivering Value

The ability to realize benefits depends crucially on implementation. This is

where KM practitioners can learn extensively from each other. Perhaps, the
overriding message that comes through again and again is that KM is not

Page | 34
simply a technological solution. It is about people, processes and
leadership.

To reiterate this point, many of the KM pioneers who have seen their
organizations achieve significant benefits, did not have to justify ROI in
financial terms. Even today a recent survey showed that around half of KM
initiatives were not justified on ROI. The leaders had a clear vision and
understood intuitively the contribution of better knowledge management
to the business. As one Chief Knowledge Officer told me “a good anecdotal
story goes a lot further in convincing people of the merits of KM than a
financial spread sheet”!

Extending the Concept

We learn by connecting new information to patterns that we already
understand. In doing so, we extend the patterns. So, in my effort to make
sense of this continuum, I searched for something to connect it to that
already made sense. And, I related it to Csikszentmihalyi's interpretation of
complexity.

Page | 35
Csikszentmihalyi provides a definition of complexity based on the degree to
which something is simultaneously differentiated and integrated. His point
is that complexity evolves along a corridor and he provides some very
interesting examples as to why complexity evolves. The diagram below
indicates that what is more highly differentiated and integrated is more
complex. While high levels of differentiation without integration promote
the complicated, that which is highly integrated, without differentiation,
produces mundane.

Knowledge Management
Best Practices & Tips
The following are lists of best practices and knowledge management tips
compiled from business-oriented publications.

Productivity enhancement – practical tips for designing and using

information:
 Time control: How does the information’s appearance effectively
guide the eyes?
 Workplace wellness: How can healthy work environments and
lifestyle habits improve productivity?

Page | 36
 Speedy research: How can the data needed to create quality
information be collected efficiently?
 Document structuring: What is the logical hierarchy (or hypertext
linking) of information blocks?
 Information design: How does the information’s appearance
effectively guide the eyes?
 Target writing: How do word choice and terminology, as well as
sentence and paragraph cohesion, influence meaning and action?
 Processing infrastructure: How can a well-organized office, desk
and computer desktop improve work performance?
 Filtering techniques: What are the cognitive and technical aids to
increasing work process efficiency?
 Speedy reading: Taking into account company culture, language
and information quality standards, how can internal documentation be
read more quickly?
 Speedy notation: Taking into account company culture, language
and information quality standards, how can verbal information be written
more efficiently?
 Clarify your information needs. What are your goals, priorities and
critical decisions? What information and knowledge do you need to
support them?
 Develop a sourcing strategy. Consider what periodicals or
databases you need to scan regularly and which are accessible when you
need them. Identify the best content sources, including people, for each
of your information needs.

Page | 37
 Clarify what you want "pushed" at you and what you want to
"pull" as needed. For which information is it essential that you be alerted
about changes? It is more efficient to err on the side of just-in-time pull
rather than ask to see everything.
 Work out how and when to process information. With incoming
information, you can read it immediately, file it or trash it. Using software
filters to automatically process incoming electronic information turns
push into pull. If you don’t need to work on a given folder right now,
that’s e-mail you don’t, need to read yet.
 Set criteria for what you want to file and save. Why do you want
to keep it? For me it is seminal articles, essential reference material and
work in progress. For most of the rest, I rely on the Internet and other
sources that allow me to access what I need when I need it.
 Create a personal filing system with a well-designed structure
that is appropriate to your work activities and areas of knowledge. File
things away as soon as you can; don’t leave them in a "to read" pile. For
computerized information, use search tools that index all the information
on your PC regardless of format.
 Refine your information. You might, for example, codify
information into different categories, such as facts, opinions and
examples. As you collate it and use it, synthesize key concepts and
messages.
 Review your information periodically. Prune ruthlessly based on
use. Some people code their files by colors that tell when they last

Page | 38
accessed a file. If they don’t access it within a time limit, they don’t keep
it.

Page | 39
 Ten Lessons Learned in the
Literature
 Effective knowledge management systems have specific users who
demand specific data to inform decisions for which they are held
accountable.
 The sustained commitment of ministry leadership is directly tied to the
sustainability of a knowledge management system.  As initial
“champions” become distracted or disenchanted, the odds of the
knowledge management system effort stalling increase.
 Incentives in developing countries to use objective information tend to be
weak.  Other criteria (e.g. securing funding, rewarding supports) may be
more important in determining the success of a manager or a
policymaker.  Frequently, the absence of reliable data can be to the
advantage of the potential user.  Knowledge management system users
tend to contribute and use information when there are rewards for doing
so.
 Donors often overestimate client demand for knowledge management
systems.  These misconceptions often take the form of: “The demand for
a good knowledge management is always there – the only things lacking
are the means,” or “If given the information, decision-making will be
rational.”
 Knowledge management systems tend to be over-designed.  Systems
with the highest use and downstream adaptation tend to be simple and
modest in scope.  Similarly, knowledge management system design tends

Page | 40
 to be burdened by unrealistic expectations about the degree of precision
“required” without taking into account precision’s high costs.
 In most cases, more information is collected that actually analyzed and
applied toward decision-making.  Knowledge management reform should
focus first only on information that directly informs priority decisions.
 Effective systems tend to build-off of existing databases, taking advantage
of current data collection routines.  Maintaining familiarity while
enhancing efficiency builds early wins for a more ambitious, long-term
effort.
 Most knowledge management interventions – assessment, design, and
implementation – tend to focus on technical solutions created by
technical teams, and tend to overlook the organizational processes and
institutional incentives that drive information use.
 Large-scale knowledge management efforts require stakeholder/user
consensus.  New information tends to create “losers” who may actively
resist implementation.  Broadening information use at all levels tends to
increase the likelihood of ownership.
 Knowledge management systems tend to have the greatest impact on
planning and policy support – at that stage policymakers have the
greatest latitude to act in response to new information.
 Source: Luis Crouch, MirceaEnache, Patrick Supanc. Education
Management Information

Page | 41
 Knowledge Management in
Government Organizations
A great need has been felt in recent years for using knowledge
management that is hardly established in government organizations.
Globalization in alterations and the induction of values such as contribution,
citizen- oriented ness and knowledge- oriented ness in modern theories of
public administration and also issues such as government- shrinkage and
exertion of instead of incumbency make it necessary for government
sectors to take knowledge management in government organizations; there
are three main subjects:

 Is it possible to use management knowledge in government

organizations?
 Can the existing knowledge management models be used?
 What are the components and dimensions of knowledge management in
government organizations?

 Introduction
Knowledge is rapidly changing to the most important stable competitive
benefit for organizations. The views based on sources have became to the
views based on knowledge and this sources alteration will be the most
important organizations challenge in knowledge age ( wig, 2002:7).
Prosperous organization's Gchwkv are who have allocated much more
knowledge to himself than others. The evidences suggest there are
increasing tendencies toward utilizing knowledge management in

Page | 42
organizations and factors such as globalization, citizen- orientedness,
contribution and knowledge- oriented ness have increased its necessity. In
traducing issues such as government- shrinkage, exertion of authority
instead of incumbency, private sector ability increasing and increasing of
citizen knowledge, this necessity is felt more in government organization.
Despite these cases, government organization have many features of
traditional official in their performance, while private sector organizations
facing with this issue have better performance ( Kuaiman & Elyasen, 1370:
pp. 9-24).However, it seems that government organizations should lead
more toward these alterations because of their special identity and their
sensitive role which play affairs yet, and have faced little changes regarding
to a rounding world alterations and every day the distance between these
organization and private sector ones in utilizing and attaining knowledge
become more and more. Today many people have this question: why
government organizations suffer from insufficiencies in realization of
society democratic and social values Knowledge management study shows
private sector has paid more attention to this subject and has emphasized
on it as a business strategy and for increasing profitability- also, this subject
is newly established in public sector and has paid less attention to it. Here,
there is this question: what is the application of knowledge management in
government organizations? Is it necessary to use and discuss about
knowledge management in government organizations due to their role and
identity?

In following, we study about knowledge management necessity and

importance in government organizations.
Page | 43
 Knowledge management necessity in government organizations
1. alteration in sources structure
2. modern tendencies of policy – making
3. exertion of authority instead of incumbency
4. globalization
5. increasing the ability of private sector
6. increasing of citizen – knowledge
7. loss of experienced forces in government organization

 Is it possible to use management knowledge in government

organizations?

We live in a world that sudden changes become globalize severely.

Everyday the terms such as orient ness- knowledge economy, knowledge
organization and scholars become more familiar to us. Sudden alterations
and making challenge have provided opportunities for organizations. As an
example, information technology (IT) beside its special challenges has also
prepared some opportunities (e.g., simultaneous concentration and non-
concentration) for organizations. Historical study shows techniques such as
business processes Re- engineering (BPR) and total quality management
(TQM) have primarily appeared and grown in great companies of private
sector, Knowledge management also follows this norm. The experiences
have shown that knowledge management has passed its exam well and
proved that it is not an unstable and temporary mode. The evidences show
that government organizations must become blend with knowledge
management. Today, governments such as U.S.A, England, Finland and

Page | 44
Malaysia take main steps for establishment and knowledge management in
their government organizations. These most important steps are as
following.

1. Reinforcement of support culture of knowledge management

2. Codify goals and knowledge management strategies.
3. Structures planning for knowledge management in organization
official inter- structure.
4. Codify knowledge management processes.
5. Providing necessary technical infra- structures in order to develop
knowledge management activities.
6. codify required training programs for staffs (OECD, 2003:4-8)

Studying of authorities opinions shows the necessity of utilizing knowledge

government in government organization is inevitable, but the main
question is that can government organization use the exits models of
knowledge management; mainly have created in private sector.

 Providing policy making partners

 The quality of government services
 Appropriate technology selection
 Knowledge management processes selection
 Creating knowledge teams
 Providing official rewards and cognition
 Providing required information about knowledge management
benefits knowledge

Page | 45
Creating an environment based on reliance

Reservation (save)

Selection

Acquire knowledge

Utilizing

Distribution

Determination recognition

Knowledge management dimensions in government organizations

Producing culture for knowledge distribution in government organizations

 Knowledge management obstacles in government

organizations. Knowledge management main obstacles in government
organizations are briefly as follows:

1-cultural and human factors

One of the main knowledge management. Obstacles in government
organizations is that individuals (inter and exo- organization) won't want
share their knowledge with others and apply it just for their personal goals.
Ultra categorizing of information in government organizations for non-
achieving of others to these is propagated the culture of knowledge
distribution absence

Page | 46
2-structural factors
usually, government organizations structure is inflexible and like a chain
(hierarchy- like) and is not able to react against environment sudden
changes. Formality, complication and high concentration are some features
of government organizations. Knowledge management is required flexible
structure based on counter reliance and encourages exo- axle organization

3-political factors
on the contrary early theoreticians of government manage- ment (Wilson,
1887) that had believed office (control) separation from policy , today, it is
believed that government management and organizations can't separate
from their political environment. Political factors impacts on government
organizations are more than their impacts on private sector organizations.
For example, authoritative parties and political groups can use government
organization present knowledge for their goal realization. Also, alteration in
government parties can make alteration in government organizations
management that it may shorten management life time and as result
decreases management support for knowledge management programs
performing (berquin, 2000:8).

4-Easy availability to public sector credits

Private sector organizations have felt the necessity of applying knowledge
management more early than government organization. One of the main
reasons of this matter is their independency on government credits. As
government organizations acquiring to this great source (knowledge) has
been slowly because of their easy availability to government credits. .

Page | 47
Finally it should be noted that before knowledge management is a technical
subject, it is social and the success of its programs is required staffs support
and contribution in all organization levels. May be managers thind if they
control organizational know ledge, all things are ok. But, it should be
considered that acquiring knowledge is just first step. It can never
determine what time is suitable for ending knowledge management
activities, because organizations knowledge needs always change.

Page | 48
 Conclusion
In this article, knowledge management in government organizations has
been studied. This study shows that knowledge management is a new
subject in government organizations which should be considered in s
special way. When we apply each framework in knowledge management
field in government organizations, we should notice the identity and
performance of this sector. As an example, government organizations are
different from private sector organizations due to their aim and
beneficiaries. So, it is natural that the frameworks which don't pay enough
attention to these subjects won't have required efficiency and clarity in
government organizations. Regarding to bring up values such as justice,
mentality, contribution, social responsibility in modern theories of public
administration on one hand, and government movement toward shrinking
and decreasing incumbency on the other hand, it is expected that
knowledge oriented ness and moving toward knowledge oriented ness
organizations become more important

A good knowledge sharing system should

In addition to allowing power user contribution of knowledge for reuse, it
should allow for organic growth of knowledge by extending knowledge
contribution beyond the few experts within a contact centre to other
employees, partners and even customers Enable the reuse of knowledge
embedded within databases, CRM systems, training modules, files and
documents Enable CSRs to search for answers in the easiest, most efficient
way possible - eliminating the unproductive search for answers to questions
Page | 49
that have already been answered Capture all interactions between
customers and subject matter experts for re-use and help identify the best
exchanges for the knowledge bank Allow creation of communities, and
enable the capture and deployment of interactions within communities, as
a way of organically populating the knowledge bank, which thenshould help
individuals find correct answers to their inquiries. This will also extend the
contact centre to take advantage of their best customers and advocates to
grow the knowledge bank. The solution needs to include expertise
management. This should permit automatic routing of specialist questions
to pre-determined experts within the contact centre, scanning and
analysing their contributions and updating the knowledge repository –
helping grow the knowledge base organically on a daily basis The KM
technology should help consolidate knowledge throughout the organisation
–bringing together both tacit knowledge that resides in expert's heads and
explicit knowledge already captured in databases, CRM systems, files,
documents and training modules as well as key sources of information
outside of the organisation, into one knowledge repository.
How has knowledge management evolved over the past few years?
Existing or first generation knowledge management (KM) systems have
realised significant benefits for businesses across the globe and already play
a pivotal role in most contact centre environments. However, such systems
provide a limited framework with which to capture knowledge and make it
available to those who really need it. First generation systems were
developed with the power user in mind. A CSR engaging with the system

Page | 50
would either need previous knowledge of how to author content for that
particular system and/or would need to be trained in order to contribute to
it effectively. These systems, often focused on a contact centre as an island
and focused on improving their efficiencies. Whilst these systems do a good
job in capturing knowledge at the front line – they currently fail to bring
together all the useful knowledge and information that resides throughout
the Enterprise and subsequently can leave CSRs without vital information at
point of customer contact. In addition, these systems do not provide a
mechanism with which to capture knowledge from valuable resources
outside of the organisation, such as partners or customers – leaving
noticeable gaps in the knowledge repository. New KM systems have
evolved to solve this very problem. Businesses need ways of capturing
information from a growing number of key sources, be that customers,
partners, subject matter experts, training modules/programmes, the
Internet, employee feedback mechanisms, existing and future
documentation, MS office applications and emails. KM systems now make it
possible for companies to dramatically grow their knowledge centres
through easy intuitive knowledge contribution using popular tools such as
email, MS Word and MS PowerPoint, organic capture of knowledge shared
via email threads and community interaction, and by connecting to
knowledge sources, such as database systems, document repositories, and
the Internet and by leveraging the expertise not just of employees, but of
partners and customers, alike. This has given businesses the means to
capture and grow their knowledge base more comprehensively – providing

Page | 51
CSRs, partners, and customers the knowledge they need, when they need it
to perform their roles more effectively and efficiently.
In 5 years time where do you see knowledge management technology?
In 5 years KM technologies will be used as collaborative solutions
connecting people to people independent of the organisational structure
and independent of the business relationships. These solutions will enable
creation of virtual communities in support of product brands, and individual
areas of interest. The communities will help and support each other, which
should result in increased efficiencies within contact centres, and also help
build brand loyalty for products and services offered. Organisations will take
advantage of experts and expertise that exists outside their organisation to
increase support for their products and services, whilst they use the same
Strategy to increase visibility for their solution. These knowledge capturing
and sharing solutions will become a seamless part of the business – bringing
together all valuable information into a virtual knowledge bank capable of
providing all individuals (customers, partners and employees) with the
knowledge they need to get the job done. Capturing information will be so
intuitive, so natural and so ingrained into every aspect of the business that
it will be taken for granted – like all things that work well in an organisation.

Knowledge Management in Software Engineering

As mentioned, a lot of research has been reported about knowledge

management in software engineering. When we searched for literature, we
found that we could divide work in two major groups: technical
development for effective knowledge management, and research that
Page | 52
examines the effect of knowledge management on an organization. We first
briefly go through the literature on the first field, and then present the
second more thoroughly.

3.1 Knowledge Management Technology in Software Engineering

Many tools have been designed to support knowledge management in

software development, for example the Experience Management System.
Many have used Case-Based Reasoning (CBR), see, for retaining and
retrieving experience, like who report on the benefits in using this
technology to support experimental software engineering more generally,
and who are concerned with CBR for building learning software
organizations.

Several technologies for experience reuse are evaluated in where the

conclusion is that CBR is suitable for reusing experience from software
engineering. In we find a number of technical requirements for an
experience database. Other work on technology can be divided into work
on knowledge acquisition and knowledge reuse. Some work also covers the
whole process

Yet other work has been done on using ideas from Experience Factory in
the construction of CBR systems, for process improvement in developing
educational software. Other technical approaches than CBR have been
suggested Additional work has been done on models for introduction of
technical systems for experience reuse in an organization

Page | 53
We also find descriptions of knowledge management systems in the
literature, like one in use in Computes and at Hewlett Packard India Further;
we find descriptions of knowledge management systems in four companies
in Norway, together with a discussion on success factors in implementing
such systems in organizations.

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has developed BORE, a research

prototype system for knowledge management support in software
development: This is a tool which contains information in cases about some
problem solving experience, and in descriptions of resources like tools,
projects, people and development methods. These descriptions are used to
find which solutions are relevant when software developers are faced with
a new problem.

Another prototype system, is CODE – a general-purpose knowledge

management system - which serves as a medium for knowledge capture
and transfer, as well as editing or “packaging” knowledge to make it easily
available [52].

Yet another technical implementation of a knowledge management system

for software engineering is developed at the University of Kaiserslautern
[53]. Here, a comprehensive reuse repository has been developed, with
possibilities for advanced search and retrieval mechanisms.

3. 2 Case Studies of Knowledge Management in Software Engineering

If we look at work on actual use of knowledge management in an

organization, we find much less in the literature. We here report eight case

Page | 54
studies, and examine what claims are made about knowledge management
in each of them, and describe in what organizational setting each of the
case studies were performed. We also place the studies in a category of
scientific methods, which were outlined in section 2.1.

3.2.1 The NASA Software Engineering Laboratory

The first implementation of an Experience Factory was at the NASA

Software Engineering Laboratory, which is reported in The Experience
Factory is used as described in

Experience in forms of cost data, process data as project methodology

information and information on tools and technology used, as well as
product data such as change and error information and results on static
analysis on delivered code was collected, and used to develop predictive
models and to refine the software processes that is used.

The results of this activity is reported as defect rates that went dramatically
down (75% from 1987-91, and 37% from 1991-95); the cost of producing
software went down by 55% from 1987-91 and 42% from 1991-95. Reuse
was improved by 300% from 1987-91 and 8% from 1991-95. Finally,
functionality was increased five-fold from 1976-92.

The organization produces software for NASA only. Thus, it is difficult to

compare this organization with normal, more competitive companies. The
article reports lessons learned through 15 years of operation.

Page | 55
3.2.2 Daimler Chrysler

Daimler Chrysler has implemented three experience factories in different

environments within a two-year period, in co-operation with the University
of Ulm, Germany [55]. The environments were: 1) A department
responsible for developing software for the aerospace area with real-time
constraints. 2) A department which develops small embedded systems for
cars, with special focus on keeping software portable across different micro
controllers, and making sure that planned functionality was actually
implemented. 3) An administrative software unit that manages internal
business processes such as car sales. This unit operates only on
requirements, and the software production itself is outsourced.

Other work on experience reuse from Daimler Chrysler can be found Three
case studies on experience transfer in the company can be found in

The study from Daimler Chrysler takes the form of a “lessons learned”
report, and reports the following findings from the three environments
(amongst others)

 There are many sources of reusable experience, and measurement is

just one of them.
 There were difficulties in finding how “packaged” users wanted the
experience to be.
 Handling qualitative data was a bottleneck.
 Building predictive models from quantitative data was difficult when
context information was missing.

Page | 56
We also find a discussion on benefits and problems of introducing an
Experience Factory in a top-down and bottom-up manner.

3.2.3 Telenor Telecom Software

In an effort to reuse software development experience, Telenor Telecom

Software, a company with 400 software developers in five geographical
locations, decided to improve the estimation of software development
effort, as well as risk management [59]. To achieve this, they set up:

 An experience reuses process, with new and modified role

descriptions.
 An experience database tool, available on the Intranet.
 Resources allocated for experience reuse and for experience database
administration.
The experience database was available as an “expert system” which would
ask you questions on the nature of a new project, and recommend an
estimation model, based on data from earlier projects in the company. It
would also give you information on company experts on estimation. This
database was linked to a risk management module, which included risk
factors found from interviewing experienced project managers. This
module consisted of a set of “best practice” processes, a tool to identify,
assess and store risk factors, and a tool to visualize risk exposure over time.
In addition to this, new roles for “experience database administrators” were
set up – responsible for technical and editorial contents, as well as several
roles for “process analysts”, responsible for analyzing information from

Page | 57
processes such as the estimation process, project management process and
the testing process.

Although the authors of the article acknowledge that the study was made
too early after the initiative was introduced too draw firm conclusions, and
that it was difficult to isolate the impact of their own work from other
improvement initiatives in the company, they find several indications of
improvement:

 The estimation accuracy improved, and estimation models were more

widespread in use.
 The focus on experience based risk management increased in the
projects.
 The organization accepted the need to collect and share experience.
The study takes the form of a lessons learned report.

3.2.4 Ericsson Software Technology

Ericsson Software Technology in Sweden have experimented with transfer

of experience on a site that develops a wide range of software applications,
having around 1600 employees who work in business units of 20 to 30
people. They develop software for telephone switches, base stations and
mobile phone management systems. The company has formal
communication channels such as meetings, e-mail and written reports, but
wanted to establish a corporate culture that facilitate more oral
communication of experience two organizational roles were invented:
“Experience brokers” keep track of what other people in the company

Page | 58
know, and match people who can have a benefit from talking to each other.
“Experience communicators” help other people solve problems, by teaching
them how to solve the problems on their own. The study reports that
employees are more motivated when they know that there is a system for
transferring experience that works.

The scientific method used in this article is a “lesson learned” report.

3.2.5 An Australian Telecom Company

Another paper [61] reports on the introduction of an Experience Factory in

an Australian telecommunications company. The study was done by the
company in co-operation with the Centre for Advanced Empirical Software
Research at the University of New South Wales, Australia. The goal was to
improve the speed and quality of software development, and to enhance
experience transfer of process knowledge between projects. This was
sought to be done by collecting information that was already documented
in the company, and to make it available and searchable, a kind of a
“bottom up” way to start a knowledge management program. The article
then reports the usage of this experience base over time, and classifies the
searches that were made. A survey amongst the users was conducted, and
the “acceptance and judgment of the product was good”. The experience
database is also reported to break down barriers between project
environments, but this is not supported by quantitative data. Although no
information is given on the research method used, it seems that the
researchers involved defined the metrics to collect and we can then say
that this is a case study. In a later paper, this introduction is described as a
Page | 59
“failure”. Although an informal survey amongst users said the “acceptance
and judgment of the product (possibility to search an experience base) was
good”, the project was abandoned by management. Some reasons for this
is discussed in the paper: 1) The researchers felt that there was a lack of
ongoing management support for this initiative. 2) The goals and payback-
criteria for the project were not clearly defined. 3) The researchers think
that a more formal approach should have been used to construct an
experience-repository, because the users were physically co-located, and
the number of people relatively small. The scientific method here is
assertion.

3.2.6 ICL High Performance Systems

ICL High Performance Systems in the UK has developed an ”Engineering

Process Improvement Framework”, which includes a repository for
knowledge sharing The engineering knowledge base contains information
divided into three categories

 Projects and processes – descriptions of processes.

 Topic-based instructional material to introduce new concepts.
 General background and further information.
The main objective for introducing this improvement program was to
“improve the predictability of costs and delivery dates of systems and
solutions”. The authors claim that there is a “perception by project
members that the framework has facilitated the transfer to the new mode
of working but this perception is only backed up by anecdotal evidence”.
The main benefit has been to “reduce risks to achieving project deliverables
Page | 60
within agreed budget, on time, and with the required quality”. Several
“lessons learned” are reported, like the importance of management
commitment when introducing such a framework, and that the developers
should be involved in designing the framework. The scientific method is a
lessons learned report.

3.2.7 ICL Finland

ICL in Finland has also made a knowledge management system. The Finnish
part of the company employ more than 800 people working with software
development, in applications and services, and on Internet technology for
business applications (like electronic commerce) [64]. ICL classifies their
knowledge resources in three groups:

 External knowledge: which includes technical Internet pages,

related to customers, software suppliers, tools, technical partners,
journals and research centres?
 Structured internal knowledge: includes databases for sales and
marketing information and employee competence, as well as examples
of frequently used documents, templates, software components, best
practice information and research reports.
 Informal internal knowledge: includes electronic discussion forums, news
and “project folders”. The project folders contain overviews of the
projects, news and important announcements, technical documents and
reusable components (for a complete list, refer to the paper cited
above).

Page | 61
ICL did a survey about use of this “Extranet system” amongst participants in
a large project with a peak manning of 50 people, and with an estimated
effort of 7800 man-days. The survey was done with a questionnaire, but it is
unclear what kind of questionnaire was used, and how many people were
interviewed. Based on the survey and interviews, ICL found the following:
Most of the project members say “use of the Extranet has supported the
work on the project and saved time”, it is also “easier to find documents
and other information”. Further claims are that the “use of project
management and software engineering methods has been easier via the
Intranet”, and document templates are especially appreciated. Learning
new project members about project work is also said to be easier, one
interviewee estimates that project managers and other project members
“save about 30 percent in time, when making a new project member
familiar with the system under development”. In all, the benefits of the
Extranet have been highest in “technical planning, implementation and unit
testing”. The most important benefit is described as the “better visibility
through knowing what kind of projects are going on and have been
completed at ICL, and the own unit”. The scientific method used is a lessons
learned report.

3.2.SD & M

The German Software company SD & M, focuses on designing and

implementing large business information systems tailored to customer
needs, and used to have problems with rapid growth. In 1999, the company
had 700 employees, and had grown by around 50% in some years [65].

Page | 62
Some of the problems were: developers used long time to acquire
programming and project management skills, the developers also had
problems in coping with many different technological platforms and tools. It
was also a problem that insight gained in one project was not applied in
others, so the same “mistakes” were repeated many times in the company.

In 1997 sd&m started working with a knowledge management program

which involved:

 A knowledge management group consisting of “knowledge brokers”;

responsible for the core topics in the company. This involved maintaining
a web page on the Intranet, related to these topics.
 The projects are supported by the knowledge brokers, who provide
pointers to internal and external knowledge resources. The brokers
participate in the project kick-off and touchdown meetings.
Several databases was also made available in the company, listing
employees, customers, partners, projects and acquisitions (in Lotus Notes
databases), as well as a Skill Database, where all employees assess their
own skills.

The company claims that these efforts on knowledge management have

reduced the impact of the problems described: “it can be seen very clearly
that the problems described ... do not occur nearly as often as before,
despite continuing double-digit growth”. The scientific method used is a
lessons learned report.

Page | 63
Discussions

After reviewing the literature on case studies of knowledge management

systems, are we able to confirm or disprove the research question from
section 1.6? Can we say that increasing the focus on experience use will
improve the situation of both organizations developing software, and
improve the situation for employees?

In the following, we will first discuss differences in what the companies did,
according to the model we outlined in section 1.2.2. Then, we go on to
discuss what the companies claim to have achieved.

4.1 What the Companies Did

First, let us discuss what kind of goals the case companies had with their
knowledge management programs, that is their “strategy”. Than we will
discuss what “processes” and “tools” they made use of to achieve this.

4.1. 1 Strategy

We find several companies that wanted to improve the situation for their
software developers, but did not have clear goals with respect to quality or
development costs. Daimler Chrysler, Ericsson Software Technology, sd&m
as well as both departments of ICL would come in this category, although
ICL High Performance Systems also wanted to “improve the predictability of
costs and delivery”. At NASA, The Australian Telecom Company, and
Telenor Telecom Software they had cost reduction and quality
improvement as a primary goal for their knowledge management activity.

Page | 64
Webliograpghy 1

Page | 65
Webliograpghy 2

Page | 66