This chapter has been divided into four sections. The first section describes how the Group Benchmarking model follows the knowledge conversion spiral. The second section explores the knowledge enablers in the new model. The third section forms a Five-phase Model of the Organizational Knowledge Creation Process in Group Benchmarking in order to prove the functionality of the model. The fourth section summarizes the chapter.
7.1 The Knowledge Spiral in Group Benchmarking
In the past, especially tacit knowledge could not be accessed and its value could not be assessed. As a result, companies have largely neglected tacit knowledge. Current knowledge management prefers overlooking this limitation by focusing on the disposal of explicit knowledge. In contrast, multi-dynamic knowledge management realizes the importance of both explicit and tacit knowledge. The theory of knowledge creation and the model of knowledge spiral by Nonaka et al. (1995) are applied to the Group Benchmarking model to emphasize how the new model provides contextual and enabling conditions and means for the implementation for both explicit and tacit knowledge. The four modes of the knowledge conversion are described from the Group Benchmarking point of view in the following sections. The idea of explaining knowledge creation and transfer in the Group Benchmarking model has been published earlier in the following articles:
− Anne Kleemola and Kaj U. Koskinen: Creating and transferring knowledge in purchasing organizations. 12th Annual IPSERA Conference 14-16 April 2003, Budapest, Hungary (Kleemola et al., 2003a)
− Anne Kleemola and Kaj U. Koskinen: The Group Benchmarking Method as a New Tool in the Competence Transfer Process between Technology Companies. EUROMA 10th International Annual Conference, June 16-18th, 2003, Como Lake, Italy (Kleemola et al., 2003b)
7.1.1 Socialization
The conversions between tacit and explicit knowledge are the essence to knowledge and competence creation in organizations. The conversions are described with the help of the
124 metaphor “knowledge spiral” (Figure 3.2, Section 3.4.1), which can be thought to begin with the socialization. Socialization is the process of sharing tacit knowledge of individuals and it usually starts with building a “field” of interaction. The field is created in the Group Benchmarking process with comprising a group of members in organization to complete the positioning matrix Form working as a boundary object in the process. During completion of the Form the people share their knowledge and know-how with each others especially when determining the present network situation of the company. Before the members gather together to fill in the Form they have shared their knowledge with other people of the organization, (i.e. buyers, production staff, product developers, etc). For example, interactions between buyers and suppliers during the purchasing negotiations are a never-ending process of sharing tacit knowledge and creating ideas for better performances in relationships.
7.1.2 Externalization
Externalization is a process articulating tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. It is often triggered by dialogue (Figure 3.2), which helps tacit knowledge to move out from a person. To be applied to the Group Benchmarking process this is the mode in which the people completing the positioning matrix Form discuss about the future target for the company. They dialogue when they speculate on a future situation in which they want their companies to be. This happens by using metaphors, analogies, concepts and different models as a help in their articulation. As a result, the members of the organization have reached a common idea about the target, in accordance with which they want to develop the company. In other words, they have determined the activities that need to be developed through benchmarking and also the activities in which the company is the best-in-the-group.
7.1.3 Combination
Combination takes place through editing and systemizing explicit knowledge. It also happens when different pieces of explicit knowledge are combined. The exchange and combination of explicit knowledge can happen through media like documents, meetings, telephone conversations, or computerized networks. Reconfiguration of existing information through sorting, adding, combining, and categorizing of explicit knowledge can lead to new knowledge. (Koskinen, 2001) This type of combination of explicit knowledge can also take place with the help of benchmarking process. During a benchmarking visit one company gives pieces of information to another company, which edits and combines it to its existing knowledge platform. This is a general mode happening in all benchmarking processes in spite of the
125 number of participating companies or the direction of the information flow. When applied to the Group Benchmarking model the effectiveness of combination of explicit knowledge is possible to be multiplied. The amount of explicit knowledge, which is possible to be adopted is huge when a company participates in different types of the Group Benchmarking model. For example, when a company A performs the traditional bilateral benchmarking it learns about an activity from company B. In the second type, the co-operative benchmarking, the company A discusses about an activity with several companies B, C and D. In the third type of Group Benchmarking the company A participates in the collaborative group partnership benchmarking sharing the knowledge with all the companies present. In this type the company A as also the other companies both gives and gets information to adopt. In the fourth type, the collaborative one-to-one partnership benchmarking, the company A first chooses one company (e.g. company B) to share the information concerning the activity No.1 and secondly it chooses another company (e.g. company C) to share the information about the activity No.2. The mentioned activities are the subjects for the common interests according to the positioning matrix form. When a company has conducted all of these types of Group Benchmarking, it has a lot of new knowledge and competencies to be combined to its existing knowledge platform.
7.1.4 Internalization
Internalization is a mode in which the newly created explicit knowledge is converted into the tacit knowledge of individuals. It is a natural part of the benchmarking process. After learning the better ways of doing activities in the best practice companies, the company applies the new knowledge into its own processes, products and organization. When first the individual and then the organization start working according to new knowledge, the explicit knowledge converts to tacit knowledge of individuals through “learning by doing”, training and simulations. This is an effective method especially when the people performing the job in practice have been present during the benchmarking visits and seen themselves how the knowledge is utilized in another companies. The modes cannot be limited to happen separately; when one ends, another begins, but there are several modes, which overlap.
7.1.5 The Process of Knowledge Creation and Transfer in the Group Benchmarking Model
Figure 7.1 illustrates the process of knowledge creation and transfer in the Group Benchmarking model. The four methods in the general benchmarking process are marked as numbers 1-4 containing analysis of present situation in the organization, setting targets for the
126 future, performing the benchmarking visits and, finally, learning the best practices and adopting them to own organization by developing own practices. As the figure illustrates, that it is important to start from the beginning again i.e. from the analysis method. The modes of knowledge conversion spiral are then added to the figure of benchmarking process as showing the methods in which they come true.
Analysis Setting targets Benchmarking Visits Development Filling positioning matrix form: present (The Boundary Object)
Companies discussing about the best performances Learning by doing 1. 2. 3. 4.
Filling the positioning matrix form: future (The Boundary Object)
Analysing the present situation in the organisation