1

Strategic Knowledge Mapping

Advances in KM PracticeIS6600-9

Some material originally developed by 3M and Dave Snowden

2

Introductory Thoughts

Social computing enables us to regain the conversation in our work The conversation is critical, as the knowledge is

embedded into a live context that serves to explain and illustrate how the knowledge is applied

Knowledge that is distilled, squeezed, extracted out of stories is much less useful!

3

Cooking is a Good Metaphor Chefs use many different ingredients to create a

tasty meal There is an almost infinite variety of combinations Chefs “know” what goes well together, and what

doesn’t Herbs and spices Wine, vinegar, salt Meat, vegetables, …

Chefs may also experiment so as to create new dishes – e.g. fusion cuisine.

They need to listen to and learn from their taste-buds! Cooking is a dynamic process that involves knowledge

creation

4

Creative Knowledge Chefs We need to learn how to be good

knowledge chefs Recreating knowledge-based solutions with

the same ingredients Contextually unique solutions

The cooking rules must promote creativity, not sclerosis

3M abandoned Six Sigma when they found it destroyed their ability to innovate.

Remember – you need to listen. You must *interpret* what you hear/read and *create* knowledge that you can use.

5

What’s Wrong with Best Practices? They tie us down to one ‘best’ solution They don’t encourage us to innovate They shrink our capacity for imagination They become part of the ‘status quo’,

atrophying our future capacity & development Einstein:

“Imagination is more important than Knowledge”

6

So, What is the Fundamental Process? Sensemaking

In contextually specific ways From conversations, we learn the ingredients of

what worked and what didn’t, what is feasible/plausible/acceptable, and what is not

We mentally assimilate those ingredients As knowledge chefs, we make sense of the

world, and create (new) (not necessarily ‘perfect’) solutions

In principled ways…

7

Seven Principles (Snowden, 2008)Adapted from: http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/2008/10/rendering_knowledge.php1. Knowledge is voluntary

2. We know what we know when we need to know it

3. Conversation not codification

4. Knowledge is fragmented

5. Avoiding failure is better than replicating success

6. The way we know things is not the way we report we know things

7. We know more, say less and write least• But some people know little, say more and write a lot!

8

1. Knowledge is Voluntary

Knowledge cannot be conscripted You can’t force people to share (useful)

knowledge If you try to, the quality will be variable/unreliable

So, Knowledge must be offered freely Better still, knowledge is offered

unconsciously – as a natural component of organisational culture

9

2. We know what we know when we need to know it All knowledge has a context – and it is valid

in that context The context incorporates space, time and

human elements However, does the knowledge retain its validity

out of context? If not, is there any point in distilling ‘nuggets’ of

knowledge from broader cases, scenarios, experiences,…?

10

3. Conversation not Codification Historically, KM techniques have moved from

Collection to Connection to Conversation Collecting and Codifying knowledge Connecting people – to share Engaging people in conversation

Conversation is seen as more valid because it preserves the (live) narrative context wherein knowledge

has validity it can be a natural part of a knowledge culture it enables a focus on networks of people (guanxi), not the

knowledge itself conversation implies not simplex, unidirectional sharing but

a duplex, two-way, meeting of minds – a creative and learning process

11

4. Knowledge is Fragmented In our brains, knowledge is scattered across

memories of experiences; tacitly Our brains process, integrate and blend these

scattered fragments into new forms – on demand A KMS is likely to be much less sophisticated than

a human brain – so its capability to process in human-like ways is greatly restricted. The usefulness of KMS output is quite limited

Conversations involve not only sharing, but also creation – new knowledge is created out of shared experiences and discussion

12

5. Avoiding Failure is Better than Success! We learn from both failures and successes

Hopefully we learn to avoid future failure Eastwei: failing once is good, failing twice is not.

Too much success makes people complacent Even a little failure can be a strong stimulus

to do better So, failures can generate valuable knowledge

– if we know how to listen and learn

13

6. The Way We Know Things is Not the Way We Report We Know Things Our brains are rather good at blending

Heuristics Pattern-matching Extrapolation (and Interpolation) Previously successful techniques Experiences (Knowledge)

…in nano seconds. But if you ask someone how s/he reached a

decision, you get a tortuously structured answer that is probably wrong.

Codification of knowledge may not help that much!

14

7. We Know More than we Say, More than we Write We retain the most detail in our heads We can report some of it, perhaps

inaccurately We can write much less – and what we write

retains little of the contextual detail The more we rely on ‘codified’ knowledge

and the less context that is available, so the less useful is the knowledge.

Of course, there are some people who write a lot, say some and know very little / nothing!

15

Tools that can be used for Knowledge Sharing Twitter; Yammer; QQ/MSN; WeChat Blogs – as conversations

Usually not official channels But some CEOs do have their own blogs

Generally not ‘ghost’ written Wiki – great for co-publishing

Problems with content ownership / protectiveness Wikipedia sees destructive editors

Synthesise blog content into a wiki?

16

New Tools Strategic Knowledge Expert Network Maps

Formalised by 3M as a way of identifying who knows what and where people are located

Used as a way to identify organisational strengths and weaknesses

particularly after a merger/acquisition process redundancies, opportunities and vulnerabilities

More obviously relevant to larger organisations A number of analyses possible

17

A Simple Example,…

A

B

C

D

18

Network Centrality How central are you (or is your unit) in the

organisation? How integrated? Who do you talk to? Who talks to you? How often? What about? How many opportunities are there to learn from

others – through conversation? Individuals (or units) with a high “index

centrality score” may be in a better position to learn, to acquire intellectual resources.

19

Weak and Strong Ties: Which are Better for Valuable Knowledge Exchange? Do we acquire more useful/unique

knowledge from people with whom We have closer guanxi? We trust more? We share knowledge regularly?

Or from people with whom: We are more distant? We seldom contact? We share little in terms of day to day work?

20

The Critical Role of Boundary Spanners People who either

Have knowledge that crosses topic or organisational boundaries

Or Know people located on the other side of a topic or

organisational boundary Such ‘boundary spanners’ are extremely valuable

because they enable new learning activities, new product development, new innovation and creativity

However, the ‘trick’ is to know what to do with boundary spanning…

21

22

Connectivity & Integration Fails without Effective Site Leaders and Leader-Networks

Structural Holes

23

Structural Holes

These are the spaces between networks What are the problems that they can cause? How could they be bridged? What advantages can accrue to the

person/entity who bridges a structural hole? Will this behaviour encourage the formation

of selfishness or group harmony? Does it matter?

24

Weak connection

Strong connection

25

Post-acquisition Knowledge Integration A bird’s eye view of

skills and knowledge inventory Easy identification of

knowledge overlaps (A) Opportunity to leverage

knowledge synergies (B) by connecting people who may not know about each other

Align human resources and business needs across a combined enterprise

26

Strategic Account Management Assess the extent to which we have coverage

in the following aspects Geographical, Product, Functional

Do we have the knowledge resources to create a new product? Could we sell it to a new customer? What resources do we need? How could we develop them?

Internal development or external hiring/headhunting?

27

New Product Opportunity???

Surface Technologies Sticky – but non-sticky

Medical Technologies Bandages Non- drip, leak, abrasive

Materials Technology Capability to absorb liquids Self-dissolving

28

Creativity and Imagination

Einstein (again): “The significant problems we have cannot be

solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them”.

So, how do we reach a new level of thinking? One way is through mental experimentation,

brainstorming, conversation – between experts from different topics – just as 3M is trying to do.

29

It is not just Integration. Learning & Capacity are also Important Much of 3M’s focus has been on network

analysis. Who is where, who talks to whom, who is / not

connected, where are the mismatches. There may even be an (invalid) assumption that

network positioning is all that matters. But what about the ability of individual people to

learn, to develop new skills, to engage in experiences and acquire knowledge? Could we measure that too, and map it? Implications?

30

Matrix Analysis (Individual)

Employee Creativity Negotiation Product Development

Project Management

Basic X

Medium X X

Advanced X X

Expert X

31

Turnover, Retention and Succession Who are the top 5% of people whose

knowledge (if not bodies) we must retain? Think of ‘Bob’.

What knowledge do they have? With whom do they work? Can we ‘develop’ other ‘nearby’ people so

as to reduce reliance on them? Who are the quick learners?

We also want to retain them, promote them, and get them to network with critical others.

32

What Should We Try to Retain?What Should We Try to Let Go?

People? Knowledge? Networks? Connectivities? Synergies?

Overlaps? Discontinuities? Knowledge? Maintenance Costs? Skills?

Can we overcome vulnerabilities?

Can we enable career development?

Can we prepare for the future?

33

Problems with this Technique Which topics should we focus on? How fine a degree of granularity of knowledge do

we want to represent? Can we collect all the necessary data to make this

strategic mapping possible? Will top management champion this new idea, this

new way of representing knowledge? Is it too transparent? Are individuals too empowered to search for new

opportunities – loss of central control? Are knowledge brokers too powerful?

34

Revisiting the Theory of Weak Ties Is it more useful to receive ideas from people

you don’t know – because it is more likely that they know things that you don’t? You can learn more

Sounds nice, but it is almost the opposite of guanxi – where you would prefer to share with and receive from people with whom you have a strong relationship. Even though you may learn less

35

Balancing Guanxi and Weak Ties Can they be balanced? How? Is there room for compromise? Can you develop guanxi with weakly-tied

people? People you may never meet? People with whom you have nothing in

common – except the desire to learn?

36

Tie Strength and Knowledge

Strong

Weak

LowHigh

Strong Ties and Useful Knowledge

Weak Ties and Useful Knowledge

American Theory of W

eak Ties

Chinese Theory of Strong Ties!

Tie

Str

eng

th

Knowledge Usefulness

37

Discussion What do you see as the future of knowledge

management in global organisations? How should global organisations try to

manage their knowledge resources? Do you want to promote standards and

stability, or something more dynamic and risky?

Perhaps the answer will depend on the industry, so … make an assumption.