KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

There is no one-size-fits-all way to effectively tap a firm’s intellectual capital. To create value, companies must focus on how knowledge is used to build critical capabilities (Donoghue, Harris and Weitzman, 1999). The following section discusses a knowledge management strategy which can help organisations channel their knowledge to maximise their intellectual capital.

2.8.1 What is KM strategy

Business organisations are coming to view knowledge as their most valuable and strategic resource. Many executives are struggling to articulate the relationship between their organisation’s competitive strategy and its intellectual resources and capabilities. They do not have well-developed strategic models that help them to link knowledge-oriented processes, technologies, and organisational forms to business strategy, and they are unsure of how to translate the goal of making their organisations more intelligent into a strategic course of action. They need a pragmatic, yet theoretically sound model of what Zack (2002) calls knowledge strategy. The most important context for guiding knowledge management in a company is the firm’s strategy itself (Zack, 2002).

An organisation’s strategic context helps to identify knowledge management initiatives that support its mission, strengthen its competitive position, and create shareholder value.

A firm that had invested millions of dollars in a state-of-the-art intranet intended to improve knowledge sharing got some bad news: Employees were using it most often to retrieve the daily menu from the company cafeteria. The system was barely used in a day-to-day business activities. In helping the situation executives need to develop framework that associates specific knowledge- management strategies with specific challenges that the company faces (Donoghue, Harris and Weitzman, 1999).

Firms need to perform a knowledge-based SWOT analysis, mapping their knowledge resources and capabilities against their strategic opportunities and threats to better understand their points of advantage and weaknesses. They can use this map to strategically guide their knowledge management efforts, bolstering their knowledge advantages and reducing their knowledge weaknesses.

According to World Health Organisation (WHO) today’s era is challenging time for the global public health of populations in developing countries. Many of the solutions to health problems of the poor exist, but are not applied, leading to what is called the “know-do” gap: the gap between what is known and what is done in practice. The mission of the Global WHO Knowledge Management (KM) team is to bridge the know-do gap in global health by fostering an environment that encourages the creation, sharing, and effective application of knowledge to improve health (WHO, 2010). The following strategic directions are followed in managing knowledge:

a. Improving access to the world’s health information

b. Translating knowledge into policy and action

c. Sharing and reapplying experimental knowledge

d. Leveraging e-health in countries

2.8.2 Examples of problems addressed by KM in an organisation:  Aging workforce

The aging or retiring workforce is a problem faced by several industry sectors. Often times, a workforce was hired during a period of growth and as such, there is a large cycle of retirement facing the business at a certain point in future. Most of these employees have critical knowledge which unless properly captured can impact the business negatively in responding to its activities (Smith, 2005).

 Merger results in a loss of valued knowledge

Mergers and acquisitions result in overlapping resources and often times people are reassigned or let go. As a result knowledge of the existing corporate resources is lost; this knowledge may be about corporate assets, infrastructure, and operations.

 Unavailability of experts

During major events, it is critical to have access to knowledgeable individuals and have access to their systems. Often if this information is not stored so others can determine problems and solutions, the knowledge is locked up with the individual. Have you ever made a phone call and gotten the response, you’ll have to wait until next week when ‘Modise’ is back to be sure.

Any knowledge program must first lay out a strategy and objectives as to what the program is designed to do. The first step in setting a strategy is to define the problem that the program is to solve and address. Is it to avoid the loss of knowledge for an aging workforce? To better aid decision making and collaboration? Etc. Once this idea is developed, a clearer approach and strategy can be developed.

2.8.3 Elements of the strategic plan

A KM strategic plan should have the following elements:

• Objectives, problems that will be addressed • Approach

• Plan • Budget

• Cost benefit analysis

• People, process, data, and technology assessments • Measurements

The first step in developing a knowledge management strategy will be to identify who is going to lead on KM within the organisation. In many organisations someone is appointed at a board level as a Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO). This is a role that already exists in many commercial organisations (Skinner, 2008). The CKO would be responsible for guiding the strategy and helping develop a culture of knowledge sharing throughout the staff. Once knowledge has been captured, networks have been formed, and lessons learned, there needs to be some way of storing the resulting information, so that it is easily accessible for all staff. Owing to the quantity of information, and the massive advantages to be gained from fully cross-referencing the information, this store is usually electronic, and may be web-based.

A knowledge management strategy should encompass the need to ensure availability of personal computers (PCs), which have been, for some time, the key tool in terms of information storage and transfer. In many cases intranets are used to connect people and people with information (Skinner, 2008).

2.8.4 Knowledge management success factors

It is widely accepted that knowledge management is a critical success factor for enterprises. Not yet known sufficiently are the factors, which influence the success of knowledge management in order to measure the effectiveness of knowledge management (Lehner and Haas 2009; Helm, Meckl and Sodeik, 2007). The concept of critical success factors imply that in each branch and in each area, a limited number of dimensions/factors exist which definitely determines the success of companies (Klotz and Strauch, 1990). These dimensions may be: human beings, organisation and technology.

Under the dimension “human being” is the individual attitude of each staff member facing knowledge management and also that of leadership, which means the support of knowledge management through the executive staff. The dimension “organisation” subsumes the factors which are operated and designed by the organisation itself. To name them, at this point, personnel development, meta-communication about knowledge management, the goals of knowledge management, the responsibility for knowledge management, available stimulation system, existing social net and a knowledge promoting corporate culture.

The dimension ‘technology’ includes factors, which are related to the goods and arrangement of the supporting knowledge management systems

An elementary success factor of knowledge management (KM) is to have a common understanding of the terms ‘knowledge management’ and ‘knowledge sharing’ and how they apply to your situation and needs (Hasanali, 2002). Some inherent critical success factors are built into the definition. The success of a KM initiative depends on many factors, some within our control, some not. Typically, critical success factors can be categorised into five primary categories:

1. Leadership;

2. Culture;

3. Structure, roles, and responsibilities;

4. Information technology infrastructure; and

5. measurement

Leadership plays a key role in ensuring success in almost any initiative within an organisation. Its impact on KM is even more pronounced because this is a relatively new discipline. Nothing makes greater impact on an organisation than when leaders model the behaviour they are trying to promote among employees. The CEO at Buckman Laboratories, a chemicals company, champions the cause for KM within the organisation and personally reviews submissions to its knowledge bank. When he notices that a particular employee has not been active within the system, he sends a message that reads: “Dear associate, you haven’t been sharing knowledge. How can we help you? All the best, Bob.”

At the World Bank, the president’s support led to the creation of an infrastructure that promoted and supported the growth of communities of practice (CoPs) not only throughout the organisation, but also around globe.

Bartczak (2002) identifies the crucial elements that act as barriers to the KM innovation such as the elements of managerial, resources and environmental influences in the military. It was also suggested that, to implement KM there must be a continuous leadership guidance, support, reinforcement of KM systems, and technology support (Semmel, 2002).

Culture according to Hasanali (2002) is the combination of shared history, expectations, unwritten rules, and social customs that compel behaviours. It is the set of underlying beliefs that while rarely exactly articulated, are always there to influence the perception of actions and communications of all employees. There need to be more time given to enable employees to work effectively. Processes, technologies, and roles designed during a KM initiative must save employees’ time, not burden them. There also needs to be connected reward systems. People share because they want to, they like to see their expertise being used, and they like being respected by their peers. As such rewards need to be in order to encourage knowledge sharing.

Structure, roles, and responsibilities is organisational structure that govern the KM initiatives, for example; APQC has found common elements among best-practice partner organisations: a steering committee, a central KM support group, and stewards/owners throughout the organisation who are going to be responsible for KM. The steering committee usually consists of executives at the top level. They promote the concept and provide guidance, direction, and support. The central KM group is typically made up of three to four people who provide the initial support for projects or initiatives, which are usually handed over to the business owners once they are implemented. The central group usually consists of people with advanced project management, facilitation, and communications skills. The stewards, or owners, are responsible for knowledge sharing and acquisition within the business units. They model and teach employees the principles of knowledge sharing using a common vocabulary (Hasanali, 2002).

Information technology (IT) infrastructure

Without a solid IT infrastructure, an organisation cannot enable its employees to share information on a large scale. Yet the trap that most organisations fall into is not a lack of IT, but rather too much focus on IT. This IT facility must be standardised and updated to ensure sustainability and scalability of KM efforts. Adequate training must accompany the technology in place (Hasanali 2002).