National Academies Press: OpenBook

Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices (2007)

Chapter: Chapter Ten - Non-Transportation Case Studies

« Previous: Chapter Nine - Transportation Case Studies
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Ten - Non-Transportation Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14035.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Ten - Non-Transportation Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14035.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Ten - Non-Transportation Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14035.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Ten - Non-Transportation Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14035.
×
Page 43

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

41 There are many organizations worldwide implementing KM programs. For this research, the World Bank and NASA were chosen for further study because they were identified by the literature survey as organizations that have developed active KM programs over time. KM processes at the World Bank have evolved over approximately 10 years from a central unit providing KM services to a business process that is embed- ded into the organization. NASA’s KM program has a simi- lar history. In addition, the reader will find many references to other organizations in the annotated literature survey. KNOWLEDGE SHARING AT WORLD BANK The introductory remark at the main page for knowledge sharing at the World Bank states its philosophy succinctly and shows how it has evolved: http://web.worldbank.org/ WBSITE/EXTERNAL/WBI/0,contentMDK:20251495∼ menuPK:204788∼pagePK:209023∼piPK:207535∼theSitePK: 213799,00.html. Knowledge sharing at the World Bank has evolved over time. From an early emphasis on capturing and organizing knowledge, its focus now is on adopting, adapting, and applying knowledge in a way that helps World Bank staff, clients, and partners work more effectively to reduce global poverty (World Bank Institute 2006). Notice how the focus moved from internal emphasis to a sharing of the broader organizational goal of supporting clients in their bid to reduce poverty. Under that umbrella, many different strategies and professional disciplines can work together in one cohesive, all-encompassing approach. Continuing from the website, the World Bank Institute’s (WBI) Knowledge Sharing program includes building net- works, including the global learning network, global devel- opment network, global knowledge partnership, and world links for development. Tools used include e-discussion groups; a web casting service; a development issues gateway for gaining access to information, tools, and resources; and electronic newsletters. There is also an oral history project, which is in the main collection of the Bank Archives, com- prising interviews conducted with almost 120 World Bank staff. There are more than 80 internal COPs called “Thematic Groups” made up of bank employees, plus another set of com- munities made up of bank clients, but facilitated by the WBI. Another WBI initiative is the Advisory Services Group, which acts as the central hub of networks and other group- ings, serving as the human interface for learning and knowl- edge sharing. One of their main functions is to provide a “one- stop shop” to respond to information needs on various devel- opment topics. These groups ensure that responses are given, usually within 24 to 48 h, to internal and external queries. In addition to human networks, there are multiple libraries, cata- logs, document repositories, and web portals. Readers are urged to visit the website for a wealth of practical ideas on the World Bank’s formalization of KM efforts, implementation, communities of practice, partnerships, leadership, training, technology, and measurement. The site offers exceptionally useful and informative videos of presentations by actual WBI KM leaders discussing their strategies over a period of approx- imately 8 to 10 years to develop knowledge sharing within their organization. Indeed, this historical approach is so help- ful because one can see the progression of ideas and strategies over time. Also, the World Bank has published a number of useful reports, which are available either for free or at reason- able cost by means of download from the website. In 2004, for the fifth consecutive year, the WBI Group has been named as one of the world’s top 20 Most Admired Knowledge Enterprises. Teleos, an independent KM and intellectual capital research company, which was discussed earlier in this report, made the award. WBI was the only non- private-sector company to have made the list in 2004. INTERVIEW WITH WORLD BANK KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT OFFICER Erik Johnson, Knowledge Management Officer at the World Bank, was interviewed on April 13, 2006. His remarks are summarized here. KM processes at the World Bank have evolved over approximately 10 years from a central unit pro- viding KM services to a business process that is embedded into the organization. Mr. Johnson commented that on the day he was interviewed, he had been reviewing World Bank staff performance evaluations and every one of them has KM as one of its 4 to 6 core competencies and responsibilities. He commented that the term “knowledge management” is “seen everywhere.” KM is a career track for a few individuals who work in specific sectors and facilitate KM processes, whether it is to get content on some topic or development area, facili- tate a web portal, facilitate group learning, or build a document repository to support the unit’s internal work. He sees as a sign of success that the central KM unit that launched and grew KM processes internally is no longer functioning as the central CHAPTER TEN NON-TRANSPORTATION CASE STUDIES

internal unit. What he termed the “relic” of the historical cen- tral unit is now functioning in a consultant role engaged in assisting governments worldwide in KM capacity building. He defined capacity building as the institutional ability of organi- zations to use KM and to integrate KM strategies across orga- nizations. The World Bank knows how to do KM, and wants to spread its expertise, moving KM from what may be per- ceived as a “fun-to-have luxury item” into the mainstream. The group is especially interested in KM in governmental organizations. According to Mr. Johnson, the World Bank KM agenda has been integrated into operations, over a period of about 10 years, as part of the normal business process. Two web portals play a central role. The first is an operations web por- tal that is evolving for managing work processes. Through the portal, different databases, including transactional data- bases, are tied together. They include personal profiles and job histories, financial management data, project detail and status reporting, and other necessary documents such as envi- ronmental reports. This portal facilitates the loan process, which is the central business process for the World Bank. The second web portal is a client portal, where the client, in this case governments, get a view of data for entire proj- ects, across projects and within single projects. This portal is also tied to transactional databases. He gave the “indigenous knowledge” database as an example of another, smaller, nontransactional portal, in this case one that captures local knowledge that adds dimension to projects. An example is indigenous knowledge regarding health in an African country. He emphasized that KM at the World Bank also has an active competency focus for all staff. They are working on developing an integrated knowledge and learning platform, or “just-in-time” learning. Knowledge must be embedded and constantly refreshed in resource materials, subscriptions to internal mailing lists, and project documents. There is not a heavy emphasis on e-learning. The World Bank sees a good KM spin-off from the group interactions with face-to-face learning approaches. These group processes are clustered around sectors, such as energy. They also have COPs called “Thematic Groups,” which are alive and well, but the KM group does little to stimulate them at this point, because they are mostly self-sustaining and managed by their sectors. The sectors decide which to support, budget wise. He mentioned that the groups do not use much technology, other than e-mail systems. Most COP work is face-to-face and they vary in lev- els of activity. KM officers in individual sectors have special skills and abilities in KM work depending on the nature of the work unit to which they are attached. For example, the skills may include some IT, website building, facilitating of annual learning events, designing training materials, setting up data- bases, or gathering content materials. 42 He mentioned that in the evolution of KM over about 10 years at the World Bank, much attention was paid to the taxonomy in the early years, and now that piece is pretty much done with minimal ongoing maintenance. Document man- agement in database/web environment was paramount in the early days to build a platform. This has now generally become routine and does not require much attention. To summarize, KM staff and activities at the World Bank have moved from a central unit that created platforms and practices internally within the organization to institutional- ization—routine day-to-day functions across the operating units—to a current point at which the KM staff’s cutting edge is acting as a consulting function for KM development both within the World Bank and with clients. KNOWLEDGE SHARING AT NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION In 2002, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), in its report to the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, NASA: Better Mechanisms Needed for Sharing Lessons Learned (2002), found that although NASA officials had developed a strategic plan for KM, weaknesses were revealed in the collection and sharing of lessons learned agency-wide. This useful report might be titled “lessons learned about lessons learned,” because it describes how one organization was analyzed in depth on its institutional memory processes, and suggests improvements. Much detail from this report is included here because it contains so many understandings regarding KM. One of the first findings in this GAO report was that NASA managers themselves found cultural barriers to the sharing of lessons learned, including a perceived inability of employees to learn from mistakes. NASA uses various mechanisms to communicate lessons derived from past programs and proj- ects, including policies and guidelines, programmatic and technical reviews, mentoring and training programs, and the Lessons Learned Information System (LLIS). The report found that managers did not routinely identify, collect, or share lessons, and that the LLIS was not the primary method for dis- seminating lessons learned agency-wide. Managers identified program reviews and informal discussions as the principal source. Respondents found that the LLIS covered so many top- ics that it was difficult to search for an applicable lesson. After a lesson was entered into the system, it remained in the data- base indefinitely without further review. The report identified a number of other mechanisms used by NASA for KM. In addition to the LLIS, some NASA centers or programs maintain their own electronic lessons learned systems. Training programs employ case studies, with forums held on “hot topics.” Annually, the best project managers are invited to discuss project management. Senior program managers are encouraged to share their knowledge through a series of short stories made available by means of

43 a website. In response to specific program failures, NASA has developed KM as a formal business strategy. They have created a KM team, and conduct projects in selected centers. A system of rewarding scientists whose knowledge is used by others was instituted. Investments have been made in IT. One project is an agency-wide web portal to bring together NASAs online resources (pp. 1–35). The GAO report goes on to point to two underlying limi- tations to NASA’s ability to share lessons learned; cultural resistance to sharing knowledge and the lack of an effective strategic framework and management attention for overcom- ing such resistance. NASA had a strategic plan, but not a business plan. The report specified that such a plan, at a min- imum, should address the following: • Roles and responsibilities; • Knowledge needs and how they relate to the business processes; • Role of IT; • Timetable for implementing KM; • Resources needed for implementing a knowledge strategy; • Cultural barriers to learning; and • Metrics needed for tracking and measuring results and training (p. 37). The GAO report emphasized that many program and proj- ect managers believed senior management support was lack- ing. NASA had not established a central management func- tion to coordinate and direct its lessons learning processes and systems. NASA investment in LLIS was minimal. Respon- dents complained that there was inadequate time for sharing lessons learned, an additional burden. Most knowledge is shared on an informal basis, which, although important, is not necessarily the most efficient way, because it does not allow the information to be further disseminated or validated. The report provided examples of more formal communi- ties of practice as organized by other organizations studied. It described incentives for knowledge sharing, and stressed that information needs to be trusted to be useful. It also described the pitfall of assuming that a database will auto- matically lead to knowledge sharing. It contended that well- designed information systems and databases are important, especially for organizations with employees located at mul- tiple centers (pp. 38–43). Finally, the report recommended: • Using push technology, such as e-mail alerts; • Dedicating gatekeepers to manage and monitor knowledge-sharing databases to keep the information up-to-date and relevant; • Establishing technical linkages among the various center- and program-level lessons learning systems; • Improving mentoring and storytelling mechanisms; • Providing incentives to encourage collection and lesson sharing such as links to performance evaluations and awards; and • Enhancing the LLIS by coding information, develop- ing an easier search capability, including more posi- tive lessons, soliciting user input on an ongoing basis, and tracking effectiveness using performance metrics (pp. 44–45). Today, one can visit the NASA KM website and see, even by viewing just the “public” segment, the progress made. The LLIS is indeed codified on the public access site by topic, year, center, and mission directorates (see http://www.km. nasa.gov/home/index.html). Indeed, the website itself pro- vides a wealth of KM ideas. According to the NASA website: [K]nowledge management is getting the right information to the right people at the right time, and helping people create knowl- edge and share and act upon information in ways that will mea- surably improve the performance of NASA and its partners. For NASA this means delivering the systems and services that will help our employees and partners get the information they need to make better decisions (April 16, 2006). To summarize, there are three key priority areas for KM at NASA: • Sustain NASA’s knowledge across missions and generations. • Identify and capture the information that exists within NASA. • Help people find, organize, and share the knowledge NASA already has. Elsewhere on the site, the stated goal of the KM team is to increase collaboration, facilitate knowledge creation and shar- ing, and develop techniques and tools to enable teams and com- munities to collaborate across the barriers of time and space. Thus, NASA, not unlike the World Bank, is actively seeking to integrate technology, knowledge creation and sharing, and doc- umentation and capturing to further strategic use of knowledge within the agency. The Strategic Plan for Knowledge Management, available on the NASA KM website, is an excellent overview of the KM business process. NASA has also expressed its KM vision in graphic style in the 25-year Roadmap, also available on the website. INTERVIEW WITH NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT OFFICER Jeanne M. Holm, Chair of the NASA Knowledge Manage- ment Team, was interviewed on April 21, 2006. According to Ms. Holm, NASA become involved with KM in about

2000, more or less during the same time frame as the GAO audit discussed earlier. NASA formed a central unit that investigated needs from operations groups and discovered from their investigation that the biggest frustration was the inability to access documents. Therefore, they focused first on document management, before focusing on tacit knowl- edge. However, along with document management, they did change the rewards systems, in which, to get specific presti- gious rewards, certain HR-oriented KM practices had to be present. For example, an individual had to have a history of mentoring to get a specific award. This got management vis- ibility as well. They worked to integrate their lessons learned efforts into their training department. They brought lessons learned into the policies and procedures process, which reached broadly across the agency. The KM group worked with printers, web masters, TV producers, etc., to pull together NASA communications into a “One NASA” approach to send a congruent, consistent message to all stakeholders. The group developed IT-based resources, which have now been turned over to the office of the chief information officer. NASA has developed COPs, and there are two formal roles associated with these COPs. The first is the champion, who is the recognized expert, known as the Technical Fel- low. They work with the Engineering Excellence unit to identify who would make a good Technical Fellow, based on peer recognition of being a top expert with good human inter- action skills, service on technical committees, etc. The posi- tion is associated with a promotion, and is a job of consider- able responsibility. The Fellow needs to play a broad role, facilitating the whole end-to-end collaboration of the COP. The second formal role is that of facilitator. This individual supports the Technical Fellow, and plays a similar role to the KM sector officers at the World Bank, as described previously. This program has been up and running since November 2005, so it is recent; however, so far it appears to be doing well. Two programs are on the NASA KM horizon. The first is working with universities on open-source software to create and support web technologies, especially in very fast data analysis, and in the fast, accurate pinpointing of expertise within the agency. The latter is important to increase the capacity to form teams quickly for new projects, whether permanent or temporary, and to rapidly deploy individuals 44 based on total skills sets, not just those that happen to be in use in a current position. The second program on the horizon is on the HR side of KM. This program is aimed at finding skilled individuals, especially as identified by their peers. They are finding, in pilot programs, that indirect approaches work better than direct ones. For example, one pilot project is working with HR to find what knowledge artifacts people leave behind when they leave. Another asks people to react to, for example, a set of engineering standards, and then to identify which ones need revising and who might be the best person to do that. Still another seeks to determine who is most similar to someone else. For example, if an individual is off on another project or is otherwise unavailable, who might be best qualified to take her or his place? They are working with this type of social net- work analysis to try to improve and speed the process by which new projects are staffed, setting up teams with the right skills mix. Another social network analysis approach is to look at an individual within different systems. For example, the financial system reveals who charged to what projects, the HR system reveals degrees or prior responsibilities, and so on. Then, the KM team puts together all the data in a new way to get a more complete profile of the individual. Ms. Holm stressed that as each KM project is launched, it is passed off to another group to actually manage. Sometimes the original project intent changes somewhat—sometimes projects wither, sometimes they grow. Her own group acts as a consultant within the agency, coming up with new projects and new ideas, in an entrepreneurial fashion, and then spin- ning them off as appropriate. They do not seek to manage KM processes once they have become institutionalized. They seek to find opportunities where someone wants a change, and sometimes the KM group is the right fit to help create new possibilities to implement the change. They can be espe- cially helpful as groups seek to capture, manage, distribute, and learn knowledge. The KM group does not have a large budget, but is a catalyst for KM development across the agency. The overall goal is driving to decision tools. Cultural change and acceptance came with a “One NASA” initiative from the top NASA executive. Ms. Holm stressed the need for support and energy from the top level of management for success to occur.

Next: Chapter Eleven - Conclusions »
Preserving and Using Institutional Memory Through Knowledge Management Practices Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 365: Preserving and Using Institutional Memory through Knowledge Management Practices explores practices regarding the preservation and use of institutional memory through the knowledge management practices of United States and Canadian transportation agencies. The report examines practices for the effective organization, management, and transmission of materials, knowledge, and resources that are in the unique possession of individual offices and employees.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!