Knowledge Management Knowledge Management in Practice: An in Practice: An

Exploratory Case StudyExploratory Case Study by Shan L. Pan & Harry Scarbroughby Shan L. Pan & Harry Scarbrough

Presented by: Jonathan CullumPresented by: Jonathan Cullum Kelly Powell & Kelly Powell &

LaPortia JamesLaPortia James

Case Study of Buckman LaboratoriesCase Study of Buckman Laboratories

Introduction: Researchers have outlined the Introduction: Researchers have outlined the theoretical case for knowledge management.theoretical case for knowledge management.

Claim: with product life-cycles shortening and Claim: with product life-cycles shortening and technologies becoming more imitable, technologies becoming more imitable, organizational knowledge emerges as a organizational knowledge emerges as a competitive advantage by virtues of its tacitness, competitive advantage by virtues of its tacitness, difficult in being copied, and immobility.difficult in being copied, and immobility.

Problem: Difficult to relate to businessProblem: Difficult to relate to business

Partly due to the very qualities of tacitness Partly due to the very qualities of tacitness which lend this importance is an elusive which lend this importance is an elusive item for practitioners.item for practitioners.

Absence of a framework for managing Absence of a framework for managing knowledge is becoming a more critical knowledge is becoming a more critical problem for managersproblem for managers

An attempt to shed some lightAn attempt to shed some light

2 Specific objectives:2 Specific objectives:Develops an analysis of knowledge management Develops an analysis of knowledge management from an integrated socio-technical perspective.from an integrated socio-technical perspective.

Study uses case study of Buckman Laboratories Study uses case study of Buckman Laboratories to examine the dynamics of successful to examine the dynamics of successful knowledge management practices, and to knowledge management practices, and to consider the extent to which these practices can consider the extent to which these practices can be used by other companies.be used by other companies.

Towards a Socio-technical Perspective on Towards a Socio-technical Perspective on Knowledge ManagementKnowledge Management

In proposing the socio-technical perspective there are In proposing the socio-technical perspective there are some considerations.some considerations.

1- number of studies recognizes holistic view (more than 1- number of studies recognizes holistic view (more than sum of parts) between social and technical factors.sum of parts) between social and technical factors.2- refocuses attention on the work process itself2- refocuses attention on the work process itself3- compatibility between social and technical subsystems 3- compatibility between social and technical subsystems is the key to meeting the needs of customersis the key to meeting the needs of customers4- provides a suitably synthetic analytical space to 4- provides a suitably synthetic analytical space to consider all factors in a even-handed way.consider all factors in a even-handed way.

Socio-technical perspective (aka STS) definedSocio-technical perspective (aka STS) defined

Describes a method of viewing Describes a method of viewing organizations emphasizing the interrelated organizations emphasizing the interrelated functioning of the social and technological functioning of the social and technological subsystems of the organization and the subsystems of the organization and the relation of the organization as a whole to relation of the organization as a whole to the environment in which it operates.the environment in which it operates.

Analyzing Knowledge ManagementAnalyzing Knowledge Management

Socio-technical thinking originated from Socio-technical thinking originated from the “systems perspective” on organization.the “systems perspective” on organization.

More recently analyses stress the interplay More recently analyses stress the interplay between technology and the organization.between technology and the organization.

Relevancy Relevancy

Need to distinguish between different Need to distinguish between different types of knowledge- tacit and explicittypes of knowledge- tacit and explicit

Explicit knowledge is systematic and hard Explicit knowledge is systematic and hard data.data.

Tacit knowledge- resides in the heads of Tacit knowledge- resides in the heads of those workingthose working

Structuring of Knowledge Structuring of Knowledge Management SystemsManagement Systems

Three major layers or interaction:Three major layers or interaction:

Infrastructure: hardware/software enabling Infrastructure: hardware/software enabling contactcontact

Infostructure: formal rules governing Infostructure: formal rules governing exchange of networkexchange of network

Infoculture: stock of background Infoculture: stock of background knowledge knowledge

Method of ResearchMethod of Research

Qualitative approachQualitative approach Single Case StudySingle Case Study Semi-structured InterviewsSemi-structured Interviews On-site Observations (6 Weeks)On-site Observations (6 Weeks) Secondary DataSecondary Data

Case Study:Case Study:Buckman LaboratoriesBuckman Laboratories

Organizational BackgroundOrganizational BackgroundManufacturer of specialist Manufacturer of specialist

chemicals chemicals for aqueous industrial systemsfor aqueous industrial systems

$300 million company (Sept $300 million company (Sept 1999)1999)

International – 102 countriesInternational – 102 countries

1000 specialty chemicals1000 specialty chemicals

K’NETIXK’NETIX®®

Customer knowledgeCustomer knowledge

Competitive intelligenceCompetitive intelligence

Process knowledgeProcess knowledge

Product knowledgeProduct knowledge

Corporate KnowledgeCorporate Knowledge

Factual corporate knowledgeFactual corporate knowledge Technological know-howTechnological know-how Market know-howMarket know-how

Behavioral corporate knowledgeBehavioral corporate knowledge Social interaction of individuals and Social interaction of individuals and

organizationsorganizations

Proprietary knowledgeProprietary knowledge CodifiedCodified

KM DevelopmentKM Development

Historical (1945-1991)Historical (1945-1991) International expansionInternational expansion Problem-solvingProblem-solving Knowledge visionKnowledge vision

Transformative (1992-1998)Transformative (1992-1998) Knowledge sharingKnowledge sharing Organizational learningOrganizational learning

Analysis of InfrastructureAnalysis of Infrastructure

Knowledge ArchitectureKnowledge Architecture Elements: humans, organizational entities, Elements: humans, organizational entities,

documents, books, other knowledge documents, books, other knowledge repositories, and operating entitiesrepositories, and operating entities

Process: Knowledge Management Transfer Process: Knowledge Management Transfer DepartmentDepartment

K’NetixK’Netix®: connecting knowledge suppliers ®: connecting knowledge suppliers and users worldwideand users worldwide

Organizational Knowledge Repository Organizational Knowledge Repository (Memory)(Memory) K’NetixK’Netix®: electronic forums, bulletin boards, ®: electronic forums, bulletin boards,

virtual conference rooms, libraries, and e-mailvirtual conference rooms, libraries, and e-mail

Analysis of InfostructureAnalysis of Infostructure

Knowledge sharing processKnowledge sharing process

Customer Questions/Concerns

Technical-sales People/Field-based associates

Posted to forum Subject matter expert

Forum Specialist

Volunteer SectionLeaders

Analysis of InfostructureAnalysis of Infostructure

Global AccessGlobal Access Region-focus ForumsRegion-focus Forums

TechForum (US)TechForum (US)

EuroForum (Europe)EuroForum (Europe)

LatinoForum (Latin America)LatinoForum (Latin America)

AAAForum (Asia, Australia, & Africa)AAAForum (Asia, Australia, & Africa)

OutcomeOutcome

At Buckman, the system encouraged trust At Buckman, the system encouraged trust and far ranged thinking.and far ranged thinking.

Many associates credit Bob Buckman with Many associates credit Bob Buckman with getting managers thinking 5 to 10 years getting managers thinking 5 to 10 years ahead rather than just 60 days.ahead rather than just 60 days.

ConclusionConclusion

The Buckman case study shows an The Buckman case study shows an example of how one organization example of how one organization successfully developed its systemic successfully developed its systemic capability to effectively share tacit capability to effectively share tacit knowledge from on-going practice and knowledge from on-going practice and created organizational knowledge for created organizational knowledge for future events.future events.