Knowledge Management

Apprenez plus vite que vos concurrents !

Le Social Knowledge Management au service de l’agilité compétitive des organisations.

Dans un contexte d’évolution de plus en plus rapide (marchés, clients, attentes, réglementations…), les entreprises doivent faire preuve d’une réactivité accrue.

"L'agilité d’apprentissage" d'une organisation, c'est-à-dire sa capacité à acquérir, puis à diffuser et à appliquer en interne de nouvelles connaissances devient la clé de sa compétitivité.

Connaissez-vous votre cycle interne d’apprentissage ?

Savez-vous combien de temps une leçon tirée de l’expérience mettra-t-elle pour se diffuser et être enracinée comme une bonne pratique ?

Savez-vous combien de temps il faut à une question pour être diffusée et traitée dans une communauté de pratique?

Avez-vous les bons outils pour  mesurer votre vitesse d’apprentissage ?

Contactez Knoco si vous vous posez ces questions à propos du cycle d'apprentissage de votre organisation !

Contactez VEDALIS si vous cherchez une solution pour piloter vos cycles d'apprentissage !

Measuring the ROI of Knowledge Management - Return on Knowledge (ROK)™

Abstract : When presenting a KM strategy or project to management, it is understandable for them to ask whether the investment in the implementation of such a strategy/project will have a positive effect on the company’s performance, especially in terms of important factors like implementation costs and profitability.

What is the answer? This is difficult, but it is important to consider what you plan on achieving by implementing a KM project.

One response to the question regarding the return on KM could be that implementing a KM project would have the following significant benefits for the company:

  • „„An increase in the company’s ability to innovate;
     
  • An increase in labour productivity;
     
  • An ability to manage the risk of losing critical knowledge; and
     
  • Saving time and reducing the costs of information processing.

These benefits will be explained in the following sections...

Télécharger l'article pour lire la suite.

 

Return On Knowledge (ROK) for Knowledge Networks

Schlumberger Business Consulting (SBC) compared 37 companies within the Oil and Gas sector in relation to the time that their experts and engineers spent on becoming autonomous (the autonomy delay). In other words, the time required for these experts & engineers to make nonstandard technical and original decisions.

Knowledge Management makes a difference..

The outcome was that an "innovative" organization gains between 3 to 5 years of autonomy as compared to so called "traditional" companies. SBC’s conclusion was that, one of the main reasons for this outperformance was the widespread use of Knowledge Management (KM).

average time to autonomy across disciplines

Knowledge Management as practiced today is a proven technology and can truly measure a Return on Investment (ROI).
Let’s term this ROI as ROK ! Return On Knowledge.

This ROK will become more and more important as organization’s implement and rely on networks centered on structured knowledge. This leads us to the fact that networks and knowledge are inseparable. Networks are a mine field of knowledge, where knowledge is created, shared, validated and reused over and over again. In other words, knowledge breathes life into these network(s), which are the basic principles of Social KM (SKM).

What will be expected of these knowledge networks?

  • Record, index and classify within various Data Bases (DB) the lessons learnt and “know-how” feedback.
  • Create linkages and knowledge transfer processes between learning professionals and senior knowledge holders (an example amongst many).

The value of KM lies within the network, in other terms; the value is derived from the collective network by using individuals, activities or processes as key building blocks.

Companies must take into account the impact of Knowledge Networks on their organizations. Not only are companies the guarantor of knowledge preservation (retirements, turnover, etc.), but should also take advantage of the numerous opportunities for innovation implementation.

Interview d'expert : Jean-Louis ERMINE, Directeur de l'innovation, TELECOM Business School, FR

Jean-Yves BARBIER    

What is your vision on Knowledge Management future ? What do you think the main trends are today and will be in the next years ?

Ten years ago, some polemical articles developped the idea that two KM strategies compete on the basis of culture, history, nature of business, etc.

  • - A strategy of codification, by codifying knowledge into information (database, document databases, semi-structured data...)
     
  • - A strategy of socialization, by managing knowledge flows through people. Tacit exchanges.

According to that theory, organizations should choose one or the other of these strategies, the two of them being incompatible. Yet studies show that companies works in a 50/50 mode, depending on their nature, their culture, etc. For instance a company with a strong engineering culture will be more in the codification while a consulting company will use the socialization model. In the future, I think that KM will be a mix of both strategies, using different tools, methods and strategic management. Codification and socialization, both strategies are operative. The two approaches are not opposed but complementary!
 

How organizations can use Knowledge Management to improve their competitiveness and optimize their businesses results? And what are the main expected benefits?

There are two ways to deal with KM in companies:

  • - The defensive one: it consists in preventing the risk of loss of skills (for instance, developed countries are going to lose 40% of their workforce in the next 10 years because of massive retirement, that necessarily implies some knowledge loss) or no strategy of skills management (no strategic analysis of the knowledge portfolio, no anticipation, see Kodak for the digital photography for instance).
     
  • - The Offensive one:
  • > improving productivity: An OECD Study shows that companies that make KM a strategic priority increase their productivity.
  • > enhancing the economic value with Knowledge Capital: stock market appreciate companies that have an important Intangible Capital, including Knowledge Assets.
  • > improving the competitiveness: definitely, market shares are now conquered with knowledge and innovation in products and services.

To answer the question How?: It is necessary to initiate a “KM virtuous cycle” in four steps:

  1. Strategic analysis of the knowledge portfolio: mapping of Critical and Strategic Knowledge
  2. Knowledge capitalization: creating a structured repository of accessible, shared, scalable knowledge portfolio, codification and socialization… in short a “Knowledge Business Plan”.
  3. Knowledge Sharing: designing social tools, learning tools, etc.
  4. Innovation: designing an Innovation platform based on the knowledge repository.

The KM Virtuous Cycle is a process loop which enables the renewal of knowledge portfolio.


We just talked about the business benefits on a global perspective, but what are the benefits for employees?

There are benefits at all levels, not only for managers and stakeholders. It is essential to integrate the employees in the full cycle (strategic, operational, innovation). Benefits may be not enough recognized but they are real:

  • - Employees need recognition of their knowledge, their skills, their function…
     
  • - They love to share: "Knowledge shared is knowledge squared"
     
  • - They don’t necessarily experienced sharing as a loss of power
     
  • - They need Self-accomplishment within their job

For instance, in some engineering companies, there are “levels of expertise” patterns that rewards the knowledge contribution of employees. Thanks to this kind of approach, people can be recognized for the value of their knowledge which is very rewarding. The problem is that companies which only think about the bottom-line, the production process, don’t often realize it. Other type of benefits can be reached through KM: Customer Knowledge Management for instance provides better knowledge of customers to improve customer relationships management…


What are your recommendations to start an effective Knowledge Management project and its successful roll-out?

For the project deployment, organizations should adopt the “Water Lily strategy”. The water lily evokes a well known childish riddle: « a water lily doubles its surface every day, if it already took forty days to cover half of the pond, how many days are needed to cover the entire pond? ». An imprudent and too fast answer would be « eighty days» while considering that as much time is necessary to cover one half that the other. This answer neglects the water lily nature and the initial hypothesis! If you transcribe this riddle in term of project management, it may be: « a KM project is expensive, if the project costs 40 M€ to cover the needs for managing half of the Knowledge Capital, how much will be needed for managing the entire Knowledge Capital?». The linear extrapolation of costs will answer undoubtedly rather toward 80 M€ than 41M€! One doesn't have the habit to evoke the hypothesis of the water lily in this kind of problem.

Yet a KM project is not linear, but of exponential growth. The overall cost benefit from experience. Small projects that succeed are then spread within the organization. The Water Lilly is a strategy with constant effort and exponential results. My recommendation: when it comes to KM, do not use a “roadmap” strategy it does not work! Organizations must instead start small. It is the best way to include the change process, incentive factors, and the emergence phenomenon in complex systems. Organizations will also need the commitment of the top management. The benefits multiply with a constant energy injection.
In short: Start too small!


In your opinion, what are the major hurdle to overcome and the pitfalls to avoid?

  • - 1st trap: "everything is information". > KM is NOT information management and information tools are not enough.
     
  • - 2nd trap: assigning the KM strategy to HR only. > HR must work with other departments (strategy, information systems, quality, operationnal department…) and with “field people” as it is from them that most KM requests come…
     
  • - 3rd trap: starting too big at the beginning of the project
     
  • - 4th trap: "we have always done it this way" so the usual tools (training, documentation, database, talent management, etc.) are enough. > It is completely untrue because we have entered the new era of knowledge economy and must make the transition from knowledge as an “handicraft” to knowledge as an “industry”. The issue is historically new as, for instance, the extent of the aging population in the scale of humanity. The importance of knowledge in the economy also has a new dimension therefore is no longer handled with traditional tools. That’s why KM has to be reviewed in new perspectives, to be optimized and developed.



Do you think there are cultural specificities on Knowledge Management maturity depending on your geographical location?

For sure !

For example: there are socialization countries (e.g. Latin cultures) and codification countries (e.g. northern developed countries). The issues do not arise in the same way depending on countries. Depending on their historical situation, there are different approaches to the problem. For instance in India there is plenty of young people. For them, the main problem is "the last mile problem": they possess the knowledge, but 1 billion people need to be trained so for them this is more an issue of knowledge dissemination. In the Industrialized countries we have exactly the opposite: we are going to lose 40% of our workforce in the next 10 years therefore it’s more a knowledge preservation issue…

Knowledge & Pizza

- The more people who share a pizza, the less pizza for each person.

- The more people who share knowledge the more knowledge for everyone.

- Don't get confused between pizzas and knowledge
.


Tim Backer

Le KM et les Médias sociaux

Les médias sociaux peuvent-ils faire partie d'une solution interne de Knowledge Management ? Sans équivoque, la réponse est "oui!"

La finalité d'une stratégie de Knowledge Management est de trouver les connaissances dont vous avez besoin quand vous en avez besoin et d'apprendre des erreurs passées, qu'elles soient de votre fait ou non, pour éviter de les reproduire... Les médias sociaux vous permettent d'établir des connexions avec d'autres personnes, et de partager des connaissances.

Cependant, bon nombre des modèles actuels d'usage des médias sociaux proviennent du "social networking" entre les individus sur le web, ou du marketing social des entreprises utilisant des outils comme Twitter et Facebook pour développer leur présence, recueillir des données, et interagir avec leurs clients. Il existe peu de modèles sur la façon dont les médias sociaux peuvent être utilisés dans le cadre de la gestion des connaissances au sein d'une organisation. Nous ne pouvons pas importer des outils comme Facebook et Twitter au sein de notre organisation, et s'attendre à ce que le KM se produise "comme par magie" de la même manière que les réseaux sociaux fonctionnent sur le web. Nous devons être plus intelligents que cela - nous devons être en mesure de combiner les médias sociaux et la gestion des connaissances pour obtenir une solution au service des objectifs business.

A faire et ne pas faire :

Voici quelques conseils sur l'utilisation des médias sociaux dans le cadre du Knowledge Management (Social KM) au sein d'une organisation.

  • Ne pas se contenter d'introduire les outils et d'attendre qu'ils "fassent du KM". L'histoire du KM est jonchée de projets qui ont échoué là où la technologie a été introduite dans l'isolement, dans l'espoir d'une solution miracle. Il n'y a PAS de solution technologique miracle - même pas la technologie des médias sociaux. La définition de rôles, de processus et d'une gouvernance doit toujours accompagner la technologie.
  •  
  • Introduire une stratégie de Social KM avec un objectif business à l'esprit. Gestion des connaissances, et médias sociaux doivent être introduits pour répondre à un besoin business, non pas parce qu'ils sont cool ou tendance ! Or, "connecter les gens entre eux" n'est PAS un objectif business; en revanche, "améliorer l'efficacité grâce à la reproduction des meilleures pratiques dans l'industrie manufacturière" ou encore "augmenter sa part de marché en développant et en réutilisant la connaissance du client" sont des objectifs business...
  •  
  • Ne pas se concentrer uniquement sur la publication. Nous avons travaillé avec un client qui récompensait fortement la publication de contenus ; à travers de multiples canaux sociaux, y compris des blogs, des business case, des wikis, des microblogs, etc. Une telle quantité de contenus a été publiée, dupliquée et diffusée à travers de nombreux canaux, qu'elle a créé une vaste quantité de "bruit", pour très peu de réutilisation des connaissances. L'objectif du Social KM est de maximiser la réutilisation, et non pas la publication !
  •  
  • Mettre l'accent sur la résolution de problèmes. Les usages professionnels les plus efficaces du Social KM se concentrent sur la résolution de problèmes, en permettant aux collaborateurs de poser des questions et recevoir des réponses rapides de la part de leurs pairs. Cela aide les utilisateurs, et l'organisation toute entière !
  •  
  • Ne pas supposer que tout le monde contribuera naturellement. Les sites web comme Wikipedia, qui fonctionnent sur les contributions volontaires, obéissent à la règle du 90/9/1 : 90% de gens lisent mais ne contribuent pas, 9% contribuent occasionnelement, et 1% sont des contributeurs majeurs. Ce ratio signifie que vous n'avez accès qu'à 2 ou 3% de la connaissance globale de l'entreprise. Vous pouvez améliorer ce ratio grâce au Social KM et en appliquant les conseils suivants.
  •  
  • Relier les outils sociaux aux rôles, aux responsabilités et aux processus. Pour battre la règle du 90/9/1, liez vos médias sociaux à vos Communautés de Pratique, et demandez au "facilitateur" (ou animateur) d'encourager les contributions. Utilisez les processus KM comme le AAR (After Action Review), l'assistance des pairs ("Ask The Experts"), etc. enrichis par les outils sociaux.
  •  
  • Ne pas introduire des outils juste parce que "d'autres personnes les recommandent". Une institution gouvernementale a récemment abandonné l'utilisation de Yammer, qui avait été fortement recommandé par une autre organisation, parce que les collaborateurs ont trouvé que, étant tous situés dans le même bâtiment, il était plus facile de se rencontrer pour parler à quelqu'un.
  •  
  • Adapter les outils aux besoins des utilisateurs. Réfléchissez à qui a besoin de quel savoir, et quand. Puis réfléchissez à la façon dont il peut être délivré. Les collaborateurs nomades, comme une équipe de commerciaux, ont sans doute besoin d'accéder aux outils sur leurs smartphones. Le personnel de bureau peut utiliser un système 100% web. Certaines personnes ont besoin d'accéder au savoir détenu par leurs pairs, d'autres peuvent vouloir utiliser un référentiel global... Choisissez l'outil qui répondra le mieux à vos besoins !


Lire le dossier complet
(en anglais).

Portrait of the modern knowledge worker

Knowledge Worker

The brain of a knowledge worker - and that is just the beginning...

Source : KM for me… and you?

Knowledge Management

The easy definition of KM is the ideas, experience, events that people share and exchange in particular issue which can lead improvement as well innovation.

source : by elmi on knowledge-management-online.com

Derniers billets

Catégories

Commentaires récents