Secrets of KM Adoption: Overcoming Cultural Resistance
By Tom Tobin
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
The Major Hurdles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Companies Likely to Succeed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Change Management Judo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Defining Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Getting Agent Buy-in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
About ServiceWare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Introduction
As with the introduction of any new technology in the call center or help desk (or any other business unit for that matter), the
introduction of knowledge management (KM) often presents managers with a cultural resistance challenge. Yet many
companies are able to integrate KM into the organizational structure with virtually no resistance. The difference is the
readiness for and acceptance of change in the company. Companies that have successfully implemented change previously
are more likely to be successful making the necessary changes for KM. Companies that already value collaborative
approaches to work, and listen to ideas from all sources have a great head start.
1
The Major Hurdles
convey value similarly to other systems that are not fully
utilized; however, the lion's share of the benefits are
Typically, when there is resistance - it stems from various
fears. These fears might include worrying about job
loss, feeling a diminished personal value, and having to
learn yet another skill set. Also, some agents express
frustration with implementing a system, and then being
derived by companies whose people embrace
knowledge sharing - not from doing it just because "my
boss said so." When they use a system by direction
only, then they use it in perfunctory way - and do not
understand how it helps them or the company.
asked to use it by a management team that doesn't
understand how to use it.
Companies Likely to Succeed
Fear is a strong emotion and it must be dealt with
directly and honestly. If you are not looking to get rid of
positions, then tell your staff clearly and with conviction.
Explain how the efficiencies will allow them to
contribute in new ways that add higher value to the
organization. If you do intend to cut jobs, then don't
communicate a different message to your team. You
can put some perspective on this reality such as, "this
will enable us to operate in a stronger and more
profitable way. The people that remain will have better
job security due to the additional value you'll add to our
organization.”
Companies deriving significant value from KM are likely
to have employees and managers who understand that
knowledge sharing raises the intellectual gene pool of
the organization, and increases the competitive viability
of the company in the long run.
The goal is to change the way knowledge is shared
within the company. The challenge is putting the needs
of the organization as a priority, out of necessity, and
doing so in a way that addresses the concerns of the
agents and helps get their buy-in by providing additional
value. This value can take several forms, but will likely
involve job security, profitability, and job satisfaction.
Diminished personal value is a logical and intuitive
concern, but in reality it turns out to be a non-issue.
Once an organization begins to share knowledge, and
learning becomes part of the way business is done - it
becomes readily apparent that individual people drive
this process. The value of someone who shares
knowledge is much greater than someone who has
knowledge and only shares it in a tactical basis as
requested, or worse yet keeps it to himself.
Web-based tools built on modern architectures are much
like other applications that employees are probably
Systems View of KM
Systems View of KM
already used to navigating. The learning curve is very
minor for current KM applications. When this is realized,
the objection of learning a new system doesn't really
hold out to be a major issue.
Obviously, without acceptance (adoption) by the agents,
the value derived from implementing knowledge
management will be less than optimal. It may still
2
“What we are suggesting here is sort of like "change management judo."
Understand the dynamics of your culture, and use them to your advantage,
rather than fighting against the way things work.”
Companies realizing the best results start out understanding
the real value of their intellectual property, and give the
initiative the appropriate level of focus and resources. If
knowledge were a critical element of your business why would
you approach it any other way? So the level of focus
appropriate for a critical corporate asset would involve an
oversight committee committed to ensuring successful
implementation and cultural integration of KM, learning, and
sharing.
Often you will hear consultants and experts advising you to
change your culture. This is a tough order, and not many
management teams have enough spare time and energy to
change their present culture. What makes more sense is trying
to fit new projects and initiatives into your culture. This is how
companies that see huge gains from knowledge management
get those huge gains.
One of the main determinants of KM success is an individual
company’s readiness for KM. Has the company implemented
other large-scale initiatives successfully? Did they involve
change management aspects, and how did those projects turn
out? Did the rank and file embrace the changes, or did they
cling to previous ways of doing things. If they have resisted in
the past, then management wanting them to embrace it this
time isn't enough.
The enterprise must be ready to deal with change, and they
must have a firm grasp of why it is worth it. This is a change
to modern management thinking, similar to adult learning, in
that you must explain why - if you want a knowledge worker
to support you.
Even if you don't have a KM system in place today there is a
strong likelihood that you already employee knowledge
workers, but don't have an infrastructure that allows you to
capitalize on these critical resources properly. This is a critical
milestone in executive thinking, and it is a necessary for
executive management to have a clear understanding and
agreement on in order to be ready to make decisions that are
conducive to realigning your organization to be ready to
recognize the tremendous benefits that a successful KM
initiative can convey.
To highlight an example of how this thinking may be different
from thinking in the past - consider Thomas Stewart's book
Intellectual Capital, where he called knowledge the "new
currency." If you accept that knowledge is the new currency in
1. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, Doubleday, 1999, Thomas A. Stewart
3
business, then you are really paying your people for what they
know. This is key, because if you pay them for what they
know and they don't share it with the organization - then they
are in effect stealing from the organization.1
How can this thinking be a positive thing? It is positive,
because it positions your company to be ready for the next
phase of growth and increases your ability to deal with the
ever increasingly complex business environment that you deal
in. It also increases your ability to capitalize on your
knowledge, which has and will continue to be one of your
strategic advantages.
Change Management Judo
Now we aren't trying to change the culture, but rather we are
trying to identify how knowledge can assist our existing culture
to enhance our ability to achieve our strategic mission and
goals. That is a completely different approach, and is much
more likely to be successful. You have to play the cards you
are dealt, and when it comes to culture you are not likely to be
able to trade in very many cards. What we are suggesting here
is sort of like "change management judo." Understand the
dynamics of your culture, and use them to your advantage,
rather than fighting against the way things work. Go with the
grain, and embrace the culture that built your business to date.
Defining Roles
What does this mean to the different groups with in the
company? While it is unlikely that you will have all of these
roles in your organization I've attempted to address the
common roles that most call centers and help desks will have.
Executive management will need to analyze the strategic
mission of the company. Presumably, there is already a solid
mission statement that the executive team understands and
supports. This is what your company exists to do. Their task is
to identify where knowledge sharing could improve the
organization’s ability to support the strategic mission. With this
approach you are tying your KM strategy to a very solid
foundation that supports your organization’s mission. This
approach bypasses the need to change executive
management's current thinking, because it supports the
existing strategy. Once this is recognized then they are ready
to communicate the importance of integrating KM into their
business operations.
Objectives Tree
Copyright © 2002 – 2003 CJOdom, MS & JFStarns, D.Sc.
George Washington University has a variety of graduate
programs in Knowledge Management. One of the mainstays
of this curriculum is that you really have to take a systems
approach to KM. How are things connected, and how does
what you are trying to do affect those other things in your
environment? So by tying knowledge management to
supporting your existing mission/vision, you really take great
strides in anchoring this new paradigm to your culture. The
objectives of the organization naturally flow from your strategy,
and finding ways to enable KM to help meet those objectives
is the key. Having metrics that also support those objectives
and goals make it clear to everyone what is expected, and
goes a long way to ensuring acceptance of the changes
needed for implementing KM. 2
Operational managers readily grasp ideas and initiatives that
executive managers are enthusiastic about. The energy,
excitement, and determination are infectious. Excitement
alone won't carry you to your destination. You'll need goals
that help managers understand how and why this is important
to them in being successful in their missions and goals. They
need to know the consequences of success and failure when it
comes to KM and what will be expected of them going
forward. To get their buy-in you will need for them to clearly
understand what, why, and how they are to support the KM
initiative - as well as what your expectations are.
If managers don't have any skin in the game they are likely to
revert to their existing goals and measurements, which won't
really help your initiative. However, if they have objectives and
goals tied to the KM strategy, which is tied to your
company/organizational strategic mission, then you have an
integrative management approach to all that you are trying to
accomplish. This integrative management approach fits in your
culture, existing goals, and pulls in individuals through their
connection to the organization and how they contribute to
those goals.
Supervisors also have a key role to play in the buy-in and
cultural adoption of a knowledge sharing environment that will
allow your organization to maximize it's intellectual capital.
Their role is somewhat different than the managers in that they
are closer to the agents (typically), and they are the ones
communicating goals and delivering performance feedback.
This role is critical since it is the level of management that
usually has the most direct interface with the agents.
One issue that agents usually raise concerning supervisors is
that they don't know how to use the system that the agents
are in all day (this is true for CRM, KM, Call tracking, etc.) so it
is important to invest the time and resources to train
supervisors on the system. It is also important to educate them
on the value of knowledge sharing to the organization, their
team, and them as individuals. They have the real chance to
augment what you communicate in your formal and informal
communications to the people in your employ. This combined
effect of hearing a consistent message goes a long way to
swaying people who are on the fence about beginning to
share their knowledge. Once team leads or senior technical
agents understand the value of sharing, and how their role
takes on greater importance, then you will have a valuable ally
in this group who will eagerly assist you in making this initiative
a success. Very often this group will be where you will get
some of your best and most prolific knowledge
authors/contributors, so their importance is clear to
any KM undertaking.
2. George Washington University, KM Graduate Course - KM: Organization & Processes, Copyright © 2002 - 2003 CJOdom, MS & JFStarns, D.Sc.
4
“Spend the extra time and energy into understanding what the appropriate motivations
are for sharing knowledge with this group, and get them on your side.”
If the message is consistent in writing (goals, performance
evaluations, job descriptions) and when interfacing with different
levels of the management team then it takes on a greater
meaning to an employee. When they get one message from the
managers, and another from their supervisors, the opportunity to
pick a direction also dilutes the effort to transform. People tend
to do what their immediate boss asks of them, since the reward
and punishment are so immediate.
Supervisors can contribute in another subtler way, also. Not only
do they speak about the new way of doing things, lead by
example, and measure compliance - but they have the
opportunity to enthusiastically do so. Their enthusiasm can be
easily detected or noticed to be absent by the staff around them.
A large part of getting acceptance to be a part of the culture is
to promote it in a genuine and enthusiastic way. A phony
gratuitous endorsement will have the opposite affect. It would
be code for "I don't really mean it."
Team Leads or Senior Technical Agents have a special role as
well. Very often they are self-selected by their peers as subject
matter experts, and people will trust them in ways they may not
trust "management." These roles often serve as situational
leaders even when they do not have organizational authority. As
a result of this special role, they are uniquely in position to help
or hurt your knowledge management initiative (and most other
initiatives as well).
Here is where the culture is operating, generally, below the radar
of most managers, agents express their true feelings, and
decisions about opinion are formed. Spend the extra time and
energy into understanding what the appropriate motivations are
for sharing knowledge with this group, and get them on your
side.
Once team leads or senior technical agents understand the value
of sharing, and how their role takes on greater importance, then
you will have a valuable ally in this group who will eagerly assist
you in making this initiative a success. Very often this group will
be where you will get some of your best and most prolific
knowledge authors/contributors, so their importance is clear to
any KM undertaking.
Getting Agent Buy-in
The bulk of your people are likely customer- (internal or external)
facing agents. So the question becomes how do you get them
to actively and willingly participate? Again the answer is in
finding the correct motivation, communicating the what, why,
5
when, and how. The why of course being paramount, and it
must be clearly and consistently communicated so that the
message saturates the cultural conscious and can be tested,
verified, and assimilated.
You are asking these agents to change the way they do their
jobs, so accordingly they will often be guarded. "Why am I
being asked to do things differently?" is a typical question
agents will ask, or at least think. Your answer is important. You
should be able to clearly and convincingly communicate "the
why" to your agents from the following three perspectives:
1. Why is it important to the organization?
2. Why is it important to the group/team/department
that the agent is in?
3. Why is it important to them as an individual?
(We all ask this one)
If your managers, executives, supervisors, and team leads all have
the ability to converse on the why with a consistent tone then
people will know that management is committed to this change.
When they see their job descriptions, performance reviews, and
feedback incorporating the new duties then this new way of
working will begin to take hold. Before long this will become
"the way we do it here." This is when you will realize the
powerful return on investment (ROI) that is achievable from a
successful KM initiative. Few other initiatives can have this type
of impact on your organization.
Remember the basic fears that people have regarding
knowledge sharing - fear of job loss, fear of diminished personal
value, and fear of learning a new system. The entire
management team must learn to effectively address these in
their own words and should expect that they may arise at some
point.
It's also key that you clearly communicate, on a regular and
reinforcing basis, what is expected of the agents. Typical talking
points include:
• When should the system be used?
• How will use be measured?
• What metrics will be monitored?
• What behaviors are expected?
• How will feedback be communicated?
• Are they expected to contribute to the system?
• If so when, how, and what steps are required to do so?
• Who do they consult if they have a question or a problem?
These are all very good questions and it is important that they ask them, and that you be able to clearly explain your
answers and how each contributes value to the organization. If everyone understands why and how it will help the
company/organization, group and them - then buy-in becomes a lot easier.
If you are at the initial stages of a KM implementation then you have an opportunity to take this approach from the
beginning. Here is a simple test to see if this would work for your environment. If you were an agent working in your
call center or help desk - wouldn't you appreciate this approach?
Summary
The goal is to understand what is involved in cultural resistance to knowledge management implementations that
some organizations encounter, and take steps to avoid these issues in your KM initiative. By focusing on the existing
strategy that your organization operates by, and understanding how knowledge management can help you achieve
that mission, then you will ultimately be able to articulate a significant value statement for KM, and it will likely go a
long way to getting some excitement in the executive team.
By analyzing how KM helps each group within your organization and communicating what it means to them in a
consistent manner you can also gain their support. Collectively you can maximize your intellectual capital and the
value it conveys to your operations.
In today's knowledge economy it is very likely that people are your most important assets, and that is largely due to
their knowledge. The knowledge they have today and may take with them when they leave, as well as the
knowledge that will flow through in the future are critical assets.
Companies and organizations are at a cross roads and right now they have the opportunity to choose a knowledge
sharing environment, or not. As competitive pressures, a global economy, and ever-higher demands in services levels
continue to increase the need to know what you know as an organization will become more and more critical. What
might be considered a competitive advantage today will likely be a basic business requirement in the near future.
About the Author
Tom Tobin is ServiceWare’s Director of Business Analysis. Tom has authored technical training videos and computerbased training for General Physics. He has also served as the business applications manager at Canon ITS, where he
managed a variety of technical application projects including: knowledge management, IVR, and Intranet/Internet
strategy consulting. Tom has an MBA from the College of William & Mary, and a BS from the State University of New
York. He holds a graduate certificate in Knowledge Management from George Washington University.
About ServiceWare Technologies
ServiceWare is a leading provider of knowledge-powered applications for customer service and IT support -empowering organizations to deliver superior service while reducing costs. ServiceWare's problem
resolution software, ServiceWare Enterprise™, enables agents and end-users to quickly find accurate and
consistent answers to even the most complex problems – in the call center, help desk or via Web selfservice. ServiceWare's self-learning and organizing search technology, the Cognitive Processor®, adapts
based on usage and it's easy-to-use knowledge management tools allow agents to access both structured
and unstructured knowledge sources and contribute new solutions in the workflow, ensuring a robust
knowledge base solution.
Leading organizations have implemented ServiceWare software including EDS, H&R Block, AT&T Wireless,
Cingular Wireless, Fifth Third Bancorp, Green Mountain Energy, Reuters, and QUALCOMM. Learn more
today by visiting www.serviceware.com or call 1.800.572.5748. Outside North America, call our
international office at + 44 0 1280.826345.
6