How to preventCorporate knowledge (intellectual capital) from walking out of the door.
Moyomola Bolarin
2007
In this writing, I will discuss the following:
1. My professional understanding of KM
2. My suggestion
1. My professional understanding of KM
The concept of knowledge management is not new but the advancement in information
and communication technology makes it more prominent in today’s corporate affairs.
Any organization of excellent status cannot avoid not looking into preventing its
intellectual capital from walking out of the door. Therefore, making KM an important
program in an organization.
In the field of education and learning, KM is known as “organizational learning and
management”; others refer to it as corporate knowledge or corporate “wisdom”.
The fundamental question that makes KM more prominent in learning domain is how
much of what you know do you know you know? In other word, how much of what
an Organization knows does the Organization know it knows?
Organization knowledge or wisdom, intellectual capital, is based on the calibre,
experience, expertise, and know-how of the people working at the organization. This
knowledge is available in two forms: explicit (what is written) and tacit (what remains in
the head unwritten).
Explicit knowledge represents only 20% of an organization learning or wisdom whereas
tacit knowledge represents 80% and very difficult to articulate but also the most valuable
knowledge assets of any organization.
Each day, at the close of work that staff goes home, 80% of the organization learning or
know-how walk out of the door. This brought the idea of KM with the purpose of
converting tacit to explicit knowledge (knowledge harvesting) to enhance the
organization efficiency and cost saving.
KM is based on the following three cases among others:
Case 1:
Staff X has been working at the organization for more that 25 years. Reached age
60 or more and due for retirement.
The organization invested 25 years in him/her to become an expert in his/her
field.
He has acquired enormous experience and know-how or problem-solving skill
through learning by doing, trial and errors, and successes from failures.
He is now an expert who can predict end results from the beginning of a task or
challenge, learnt out of experience which are not written down.
He retired or resigned voluntarily and left THE ORGANIZATION
His experience: explicit, 20% left at THE ORGANIZATION; tacit, 80% in his
head gone with him.
Staff Y is newly recruited, younger and with less than 10 years experience in the
same field as staff X.
Ran into a similar challenge that staff X had once overcome through trial and
error, learning by doing or success from failures.
No record of staff X tacit knowledge of know-how to reference, therefore, staff Y
has to start all over and learn from his own mistakes, and trail and errors.
But
If staff X tacit knowledge had been harvested in this instance and made available
to staff Y, there will be no need to re-invest the wheel, thereby saving the
organization the time and cost of going through the mistake again.
Therefore KM program should have capture the tacit knowledge of staff X , convert it
to explicit and make it available for many others like staff Y.
Case 2:
Staff A in Unit 1 needs to learn X to carry out a task.
Staff B in Unit 2 has the skill and know-how that is presently not in use
Staff A is not aware of staff B’s skill and know-how,
Therefore
Staff A travel to institute/country C to learn the skill
Because
No professional interaction between staff A and B
No knowledge auditing and knowledge structure mapping, a function of KM, to
let the management be aware that the skill is available in-house.
Consequence
Organization spend $$$$$ to train staff A in institute/country C.
Case 3:
The organization needs to reduce staff strength due to financial constraint without
reducing quality of service.
Therefore
Organization needs knowledge auditing to make well informed decision as to who
goes without placing the organization’s quality of service at risk.
KM strategies and tools
For case 1:
Documentation of after action reviews
o Lesson learnt from a project
o Best practices documentation
Connection to other projects
Exit interview of retired or voluntarily resigned staff
Expert interview: interviewing selected experts by peers and professionals
Community of practices
Knowledge harvesting
Storytelling.
For case 2 and 3:
Knowledge auditing: staff profiles, needs, resources and flow.
Knowledge structure mapping (computer software required)
Techniques and technology
Capturing action reviews, interviews and story telling using audio/video
recording.
Transcribing into text-based format, and edit word and grammar or
develop further into publications: manuals, practical guides, training
materials, e-learning materials, orientation guide to new recruits, etc.
Store in knowledge portal/database on corporate intranet
Develop or adopt content management system, document management
system (e-library) and searching engine
Encourage use of online collaboration tools:
o Threaded e-mail discussions on corporate intranet
o Online discussion boards on intranet
o Videoconferencing with distance experts
o Workflow tools
o E-learning
Cases in KM may appear simple at first glance but the implementation is a daunting task
2. My suggestion
1. Possibly develop a KM strategy document
2. Start with a focus on case 1 and gradually include case 2 and 3 at later time to
avoid overwhelming influence
3. Identify key experts and exiting staff to start with at the initial stage.
4. Do not merge KMU with other unit but encourage interaction with the
technology-based units and research programs with strong management backing
that all staff should be aware off.
Hope you find this useful.
