AME the New Edge of G Knowledge Management and Transfer of Best

AME

The New Edge of Knowledge Management and Transfer of Best Practices Carla O’Dell, Ph.D. President www.APQC.org 2009 North American MAKE Award Winners h Apple h Hewlett‐Packard h APQC h IBM h ConocoPhillips h IDEO h Fluor h Microsoft h Google h MITRE

“Research has found it not A B uncommon to find 3 to 1 4 2 differences between best 1 2 and worst sites in the 1 2 same firm.”

Why is it so hard in organizations?

Skills and experience Tacit 80%

Hard to articulate

Harder to transfer LdLeads to competency

h Information and knowledge exist ‐‐ but won’ t automatically flow. h Without a systematic process and supportive environment, it won’t move.

Why should I rely on Will it make more information from you? work for me? ANOTHER program?

Silo mentality We don’t have time

Not invented HERE . I don’t know what you know. I don ’t know what to ask.

Share Identify

Prepare RiReview

The chain won’t hold if any link is broken.

Tacit -Internal benchmarking -Knowledge Champions -Best Practice Teams Transfer of Best Practices

Communities Of -Q&A - Trade tools, templates , best Practice practices - Solve common problems - Identify best practice

- PtltkPortals to key i ifnfo: method s, templ a tes et c Self-Service + - Search capability -Expert directories Explicit -Lessons Learned

Lower Human Interaction Higher

h Some prefer the term “successfully demonstrated” ¾ The “Best Practice” must demonstrate through evidence that it is 'better, faster, cheaper‘ and leads to measurably better outcomes. h Best for us: “Solutions and approaches that achieve our objectives.”

Promising Successfully Tips Demonstrated Validated Best Practices Practices Practices

Not every process requires validation of the practice

Indiana fire-fighting crew’s After

1. Motivation of source and recipient ¾ Ongoing involvement of the source ¾ Absorptive capacity of the recipient 2. Quality of the relationship ¾ Credibility of source ¾ Strength of the relationship 3. Understanding the process & practice ¾ Poorly understood by the recipient ¾ Hard to articulate and document by the source 4. Facilitation and support

District 5 and 17 ISP UNITS/STORE/DAY

18.0

17.0

16.0

15.0

14. 0

13.0 Dist. 5 Unit/Store/Day 12.0 Dist. 17 Unit/Store/Day 11.0 Company Unit/Store/Day 10. 0

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.0 MAMJJASONDJF Dist. 5 Unit/Store/Day 5.9 7.6 7.3 9.1 9.6 11.3 11.2 8.3 13.1 17.8 Dist. 17 Unit/Store/Day 676.7 747.4 707.0 767.6 10. 4 12. 5 11. 3 828.2 12. 2 14. 6 Company Unit/Store/Day 7.1 7.2 6.5 7.6 9.4 11.4 10.2 8.3 12.1 13.6

© 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 18 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by iilftself h Picking the wrong problem(s) or place to start h Naïve beliefs about human and organization behavior – people won’t change without a reason to do so

© 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 19 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by iilftself h Picking the wrong problem(s) or place to start h Naïve beliefs about human and organization behavior – people won’t change without a reason to do so h Confusing data, information and knowledge, and how to “manage” them

www.apqc.org APQC’s Consortium Research in Knowledge Management

1. Sustaining Communities of Practice (2009) 2. Web 2.0 Practitioner’s Series (()2008) 3. Expertise Location and Social Networking (2008) 4. The Role of Evolving Technologies: Accelerating Collaboration and KldKnowledge TfTransfer (2007 and 2008) 5. Retaining Today’s Knowledge for Tomorrow’s Workforce (2007) 6. Leveraggging Knowledge Across the Value Chain ()(2006) 7. Using Communities of Practice to Drive Organizational Performance and Innovation (2005) 8. ItIntegrati ng KM and OOitilrganizational LLiearning (2004) 9. Transfer of Best Practices (2004) 10. Virtual Collaboration (2003‐2004) 11. Expertise Locator Systems (2003)

12. Measuring the Impact of Knowledge Management (2003) 13. UiUsing KldKnowledge Management to DiDrive IiInnovation (2002) 14. Retaining Valuable Knowledge (2001) 15. Managing Content and Knowledge (2001) 16. Building and Sustaining Communities of Practice (2000) 17. Successfully Imppglementing KM (1999‐2000) 18. Creating a Knowledge Sharing Culture (1998‐99) 19. Expanding Knowledge Externally (1998) 20. Using Information Technology for KM (1997) 21. Emerging Best Practices in KM (1996)

Community h Eli Lilly ¾ PiPricewater house Coopers LLP h Ernst &Young ¾ Proctor and Gamble h Accenture h European Commission ¾ Raytheon h Aerotek h Federal Highway ¾ Rockwell h Air Products & Chemicals h Fluor ¾ Schlumberger h American Express h Ford Motor Co. ¾ Sequent Computer Systems h AiAmerican MtManagement SStystems h Gateway Computers ¾ ServiceMasters h Andersen Consulting h General Electric Co. ¾ Siemens AG h Apple Computers h Giant Eagle ¾ Siemens Westinghouse h ARDEC h ¾ h ARMY Halliburton Skandia AFS h AT&T h Hallmark Cards Inc. ¾ Sollac h Bank of Montreal h Hewlett‐Packard Consulting ¾ Solvay America h Best Buy h Honeywell ¾ St. Paul Companies h Boehringer Ingelheim h Hughes Space & Communications ¾ Strategic Decisions Group h Boeing Co. (IDS & Phantom Works) h IBM ¾ Symantec Corp. h Boeing Co., Rocketdyne Div. h IBM Global Services ¾ Tata Steel h BP Amoco h IBM/Lotus ¾ Tennessee Valley Authority h Bristol Myers Squibb h Intel ¾ Texas Instruments h BitihBritish TTlelecom h ¾ h Broderbund Software Johnson Controls 3M h Buckman Laboratories Int'l h Kaiser ¾ Turner Construction h Cap Gemini Ernst & Young h Lotus Development Corp. ¾ Unocal h Caterpillar Inc. h Manpower International ¾ U.S. Airforce Material Command h Charles Schwab h Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. ¾ U.S. Department of State h Chevron Corporation h MITRE Corp. ¾ USU.S. Department of VA‐EES h Cigna Property & Casualty h Monsanto Co. ¾ U.S. National Security Agency h Cisco Systems h Motorola ¾ USAA h Context Integration h MWH Global ¾ VHA, Inc. h Corning Inc. h ¾ h DaimlerChrysler National Semiconductor Corp. Washington Mutual h Defense Acquisition h NASA and the Jet Propulsion Lab ¾ Washington State Library h Dow Chem ica l Co. h Nokia ¾ Wells Fargo h Dow Corning h Nortel Networks ¾ Weyerhauser h Du Pont h Northrop Grumman ¾ World Bank h Petrobras ¾ Xerox h Pink Elephant Group ¾ Xerox Connect © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 24