Kristo Lehtonen 7.12.2005
Enhancing information-sharing culture in New
Product Development
Supervisor: Raimo Kantola
Industrial coordinator: Jorma Hietala
Problem Statement
• How to enhance knowledge-sharing culture in New Product
Development (NPD) in a way that creates competitive advantage?
Thesis Objectives
What is current state?
Definitions
Interviews
How to reach the target
state?
What is target state?
KM vision
Measurement scheme proposal
Organizational culture survey
Concrete recommendations
based on own synthesis model
Organizational Culture
• Academic review conclusions:
• A large-scale intentional culture change is impractical if not
completely impossible.
• However, culture does change as a consequence of individual
behavior, albeit unplanned.
• Commercial review conclusions:
• Understanding organizational culture is important; not in order to
change it but in order to avoid conflicting with it too much.
• Any change initiatives should concentrate on practical structural
changes, not on the abstract notion of culture.
• Change initiatives aligned with existing organizational culture and
concentrating on practical structural changes result in culture
change, too.
Software developer’s daily work scenario
Other programs
Internet
Flexelint
Looks at relevant
standards using wwwlinks (e.g. from ITU-T)
Actual coding using
e.g. Emacs
Prolint
McCabe
Work
input
Code
specific
ations
Actual
SW
files
Memory leak detection
Code testing
Action
Database
Lotus
Notes
EM system
Requirements
Management
RM-RIM
Reports
detected
errors
Code parsing
Document
Management
SCM system
Synergy
PCPErrors
Three knowledge scenarios
“Where do I find the
knowledge?”
Re-inventing the
wheel.
Ineffective IT solutions.
Only resorting to
explicit knowledge.
Dependence on
individuals.
Knowledge
access scenario
Codifying problems.
Experience
transfer
scenario
Functional suboptimization.
Implicit beliefs hindering
effective use of IT.
Stakeholders as
competitors.
Reluctant expert
scenario
Von Krogh’s concept of « care »
• Five dimensions:
• Mutual trust, Active empathy, Access to
help, Lenience in judgment, Courage
•Supportive and active
environment.
High level of care
•Honest feedback.
•Individuals form “real” teams.
•“Knowledge is power”.
Low level of care
•Sharing based on calculated benefits only.
•Limited feedback.
•Knowledge creation in isolation.
Nonaka’s knowledge-spiral
Tacit
Socialization
Externalization
Internalization
Combination
Explicit
Explicit
Tacit
Tacit
Tacit
Explicit
Explicit
Sveiby’s Intangible Assets framework
Company
Intangible assets
Employee
competence
Internal
structure
Tangible
assets
External
structure
Organizational micro-level model of
knowledge-sharing
Company
system
Intangible assets
Employee
competence
Internal
structure
External
structure
Internalization
Tangible
assets
Combination
Externalization
Apprentice
Expert
Socialization
Recommendations for 1. scenario
Three-layers of portal features
End-User
Layer
Functional
Layer
Platform
Layer



Search
Personalization
Collaboration




Single Sign-on
Indexing / Taxonomy
Syndication
Workflow









Corporate Yellow Pages
Business Information
Business Transactions
Security & Authentication
Programming Components / Portlets
Application Server
Web Servers
Database (DB)
Operating System & Hardware
Recommendations for 2. scenario
Recommendations for 3. scenario
A Measurement Proposal
Nokia’s Intangible Assets Monitor
External Structure
1) Growth
in revenue
from
Relationships
with customers
and
suppliers,
brand
names,
trademarks,
existing customers
Internal Structure
Employee
Competence
1) Customers that Contribute
Patents, processes,
computer
to Internal
Structure
(%) and
1) Relative Pay Position
3) Competence Turnover
3) Win/Loss Index
3) New Processes
Implemented
4) Trans-functional experience
(%)
4) Proportion of Engineers vs.
Support Staff.
5) Amount of Coaching (hours)
5) Trans-BU experience (%)
5) Meta-data process index
(%)
reputation, image, etc.
2) Percentage of Repeat
Orders
administrative systems, mission, vision,
and strategy, etc. Index
2) R&D Effectiveness
2) Customers that Contribute
to Employee Competence (%)
4) Employee Diversity (%)
6) Lessons Learned Usage
KM vision for Nokia
• People feel as if they have the necessary information across Nokia at their reach;
they know exactly where and how to look for that information. People have
passion for sharing knowledge and experiences as well as leveraging other
people’s knowledge. At the heart of KM at Nokia is interchanging of tacit
knowledge between individuals – in other words, connecting people.
End-user Wow!!! in writing











Pekka comes to work at 8 AM and logs on to his Connecting People portal. He is happy knowing that is the only time
he has to log-in today.

The first thing Pekka sees is a personalized UI with a personalized taxonomy on the left side of the screen. The
taxonomy has all the right concept categories based on his work role. All the most widely used programs are readily
available.

With one click Pekka can see his assignments on the portal UI. Also any action points from are visible.

He has personalized his UI to include www-links to his most widely used standard pages, such as ITU-T. With a few
clicks Pekka can access both the code specification document and the corresponding software file. If the information is not
found in those files he can use the very effective search functionality on his portal. After all, every document he ever
produces he adds the meta-data himself. The quality of the meta-data is even double-checked by the “librarian” appointed
for this task in his unit.

Pekka proceeds to coding. The coding environment is available with one click. So are also the other programs Pekka
needs while coding (programs for code parsing, memory leak detection, and testing).

Pekka runs into a conflict with an interfacing software module. With one click he gets the specification document for
that module and he is directly able to see the name of the person who had been writing that module.

By clicking on the name he is directed to the corporate yellow page where he sees directly the person’s contact
information, his e-mail address, and the department he’s working in.

Pekka sends an electrical invitation to this person suggesting a face-to-face meeting. After a few seconds they are
transmitted to a videoconferencing session. The other person proceeds to explaining the difficulties he had in his own work
and why he chose some of the solutions for the problems he encountered. From the person’s facial expression Pekka
immediately notices that one problem was especially difficult. No he knows to pay special attention to it in his own work, as
well.

Pekka continues his work. As he encounters an error he can with a few clicks start writing the error report which is
already pre-filled. After he has finished the report he can get back to his work knowing that the workflow functionality will
transmit the report further to the right person.

By using the BPM systems, which is based on the underlying product creation process Pekka’s manager notices that
this one software modules has been causing several error reports from more than on business units. Based on this
information he knows to appoint more resources to writing this module.
Information-sharing climate survey
• Knowledge access scenario related questions:
• I get the information I need on time for daily work.
• I know where to find information.
• It is easy to locate the right people, the experts, who possess the information
you need.
• How would you evaluate the amount of work in storing data to the systems?
Information-sharing climate survey
• Experience transfer scenario related questions:
•
•
•
•
•
How well are lessons learned and past experiences transferred to others?
How well are lessons learned used in your organization?
I can usually trust the information coming from other people.
The information I pass on can be trusted, as well.
What is the level of mutual trust in the organization in terms of knowledgesharing in general?
• People are actively seeking to understand other people, their situation,
problems, and needs, in terms of sharing knowledge.
• Do people I report to keep me informed?
Information-sharing climate survey
• Reluctant expert scenario related questions:
• Sharing of knowledge is encouraged in my organization both in action and in
words.
• My peers react well to errors made by me. It doesn’t discourage me from
future experimentation.
• My managers react well to errors made by me. It doesn’t discourage me from
future experimentation.
• People are willing to voice their opinions even when they are unpopular.
• People are willing to voice their opinions even when they contradict the
management.
• People are willing to voice their opinions even when they contradict their
peers?
Information-sharing climate survey
• Reluctant expert scenario related questions:
• I feel that knowledge is power. (Here an inverse scale is used: 5->1 and 1>5.)
• I feel that knowledge shared is knowledge doubled.
• Sharing knowledge even outside your own business unit usually has good
results.
• Most of my expertise has developed as a consequence of working together
with my colleagues and sharing and receiving knowledge with them.
• There is much I could learn from my colleagues.
• We help each other to learn the skills we need.
• We keep all members of our team/organization with current issues.
Information-sharing climate survey
• Reluctant expert scenario related questions:
• How would you evaluate culture of information-sharing in your organization?
• What would you like to change in terms of information-sharing in this
organization? (Open question.)
Conclusions
• Very wide and challengin topic.
• A large scope: organizational sciences, KM, Change Management, performance
measurement, information systems, etc.
• A great learning experience
• Both to the world of Knowledge Management as well as
• to the actual situation at Nokia.
Appendix
Thesis Objectives
What is current state in
information-sharing?
Define the concepts used.
Conduct interviews to
detect the current
information-sharing culture.
What is target state in
information-sharing?
Create a KM vision for
Nokia.
Create a measurement
scheme to track progress
towards the vision.
How to reach the target
state?
Investigate suitable KM
methodologies.
Detect the optimal KM
tools for Nokia.
Organizational Culture
• Academic example definition [Brown 1998]:
• “organizational culture refers to the pattern of beliefs, values,
and learned ways of coping with experience that have
developed during the course of an organization’s history, and
which tend to be manifested in its material arrangements and
in the behaviors of its members”.
• Commercial example definition [Rumizen 2002]:
• “the way we do things around here”.
Is culture change feasible?
Culture change
cannot be
planned.
Culture change can’t
be entirely planned
but an open process
of change can be
initiated.
Culture change
can be planned.
Degree to which culture-change can be planned
Culturalists
Intermediates
Cultural Engineers
KM Spetrum
Human oriented KM
• Focus on the agent of
knowledge, i.e. the person
who possesses it.
E.g. organizational
knowledge, the learning
organization,
Technology oriented KM
• Knowledge as an object
that is transferred
E.g. portals, artificial
intelligence, groupware.
Tacit vs. Explicit
• Tacit knowledge:
• is highly personal, hard to formalize and, therefore, difficult to
communicate to others
• Explicit knowledge:
• is formal and systematic and can be easily communicated and
shared
Sharing of knowledge
System A
System B
Knowledge base
context
Knowledge base
Directs the
attention
context
Restructuring
Classify and organize
Sensors
Activity system
Channel
Data
Data, information, and knowledge
Data
Raw facts or observations.
Information
Processed data in context.
Knowledge
Actionable information in
context.
Definition example
Quantity =
Q
Business Profit =
Q  ( ASP  ACP)
R&D Effectiveness
Index =
Q  ( ASP  ACP)  d
C R&D
• Information and knowledge are context dependent and everyone
provides his or her own context: my information can be your
knowledge and vice versa.
KM Definition
• KM is activity that concentrates on how organizations create,
capture, share, and leverage knowledge in order to attain
competitive advantage.
Process Thinking
Process vs. functional approach
Functional organization
Process organization
“Who does what?”
“How is the result created?”
Functional incentives.
Monitoring and managing
end-to-end processes.
“What does my functional
boss want?”
“What does the customer
want?”
A vertical organization type.
A horizontal organization
type.
Introduction to Nokia’s R&D
Customer and
Market
Operations
Technology
Platforms
Enterprise
Solutions
Mobile
Phones
Multimedia
Networks
Organizational complexity
Knowledge
access scenario
Experience
transfer
scenario
Reluctant expert
scenario
Organizational complexity
Information
technology
Leveraging both
explicit and tacit
knowledge
Knowledgesharing culture
Key roles
•
Engineer – (Could be further divided to HW Engineer, SW Engineer, etc.) Works as an
engineer in product or technology program. Designs, implements, integrates and tests a
products.
•
Test Engineer – Tests a product release based on requirements.
•
Project Manager – Plans, controls and coordinates all aspects of a project.
•
R&D Manager – Allocates resources to projects according to business needs and directs
his/her business unit based on the strategy.
•
Portfolio Manager – Maintains business strategy based product portfolio.
•
Requirements Manager – Transforms needs into product features and defines release
content.
•
Error Manager – Analyzes errors and change requests, and plans change
implementations.
•
Architect – Creates and maintains architecture structure, interfaces and design rules.
•
Roadmapper – Maintain and manage product roadmap.
•
System Engineer – Develops and manages product system concepts.
•
F&C Controller – Analyzes financial results on a periodic basis.
Definition of portal
• A gateway to information employees need in their daily work,
• providing a single point of access in a personalized way, independent of the
technology used to provide such information.
Three different portals
• 1) Public portal (Yahoo, Google, Bitpipe, etc.)
• 2) Corporate portal
• Often called enterprise portal or enterprise information portal.
• Structured around roles that are found inside the organization (e.g. software
developer, test engineer, manager, etc.)
• 3) Extranet portal:
• expands the corporate portal to include customers, vendors, and other roles
outside the organization.
• Other concepts
• Role-based portal, collaboration portal, business intelligence portal,
horizontal portal, business area portal, enterprise knowledge portal, mega
portals, e-commerce portals, etc.
Portal system architecture
Web
browser
File Edit L ocate View
Help
500
E
D
C
B
A
400
300
Help
200
Network Traffic
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Web
server
Application
Server
RM
EM
CM
Other data
SOA + BPM + portal
End-user
Portal
Need
Roadmap
Release Strategy
Portfolio
Portfolio
Management
Management
Release Content
Architecture
Change Need
Requirements
Requirements
and
andRelease
Release
Engineering
Engineering
Roadmap
Roadmap
Architecture
Architecture
Architecture
Management
Management
Release
Content
Error and Change
Error and Change
Management
Management
BPM
Project
Status
Resource
Capacity
Resource
Allocation
Resource
Resource
Management
Management
Resource
Change Request
Project
Project
Management
Management
Project Plan
Engineering
Engineering
and
andTesting
Testing
Release
SOA
RM
EM
CM
Other data
Source data
layer
Software developer’s current workday
• Input to work from RM system (e.g. RM-RIM): “Build a new functionality in to
software code module X”.
• Looks at standards (e.g. from ITU-T) by using www-links.
• Familiarizes himself with code specifications from interfacing code modules (via
CM system, e.g. Synergy).
• Looks at corresponding software files via different UI.
• Then begins actual coding (e.g. using Emacs).
• Reports detected errors to EM system (e.g. PCP Errors database).
• Additionally, the engineer uses
• Flexelint to parse a code
• Prolint to detect memory leaks
• McCabe in testing the code.
Process Capabilities and roles
Requirements and Release Engineering Architecture Management
•
Requirements Manager
•
Chief Architect
•
Information: Roadmapper and Chief •
Information: System
Architect
Engineer and Engineer
•
Collaborators: Systems Engineer •
Authority: R&D Manager
and Engineer
•
Authority: R&D Manager
Resource Management
•
Line Manager
•
Information: F&C Controller
•
Collaborators: Resource
Manager and Project
Manager
•
Authority: Business Manager
Engineering
•
Engineer
•
Information: Requirements
Manager, Chief Architect
and Error Manager
•
Collaborators: Other
Engineers
•
Authority: Project Manager
Portfolio Management
•
Portfolio Manager
•
Information: R&D Personnel
•
Collaborators: Roadmapper,
Line Managers, Project
Manager, F&C Controller and
Management team
•
Authority: Business Manager
Testing
•
Test Engineer
•
Information: Project Manager
•
Collaborators: Requirements
Manager, System Engineer
and Error Manager
•
Authority: Test Manager
Project Management
•
Project Manager
•
Information:
Stakeholders
•
Collaborators: Project
team members
•
Authority: Steering Group
Error and Change Management
•
Error Manager
•
Information: Release
Manager
•
Collaborators: Engineer and
Test Engineer
•
Authority: Project Manager
Interviewee statements
• Finding information
• “Usually the best way or even the only way to find information you need
is to ask someone who knows”
• “I usually don’t bother using the intranet to find information since
information is best found from other people.”
• “In some cases we are very dependent on certain individuals who have
some unique knowledge on a specific code-module”
Interviewee statements
• Re-using past experiences
• “Lessons learned are laborious to produce and difficult to use. Material
does exist but usage is low.”
• “When handling errors reported to the error database, it might take only
about half an hour to write the actual code but the rest of the day to
write the report and store it in the appropriate systems. That can
sometimes be frustrating, since the report writing is away from the real
work”.
• “If there has been one person responsible for one particular codemodule… the amount of tacit knowledge that the person possesses is
such that it is impossible to write it down all at once…”
Interviewee statements
• Sharing knowledge with associates
• “You just simply react differently to request by people you have met”.
• “People in Technology Platforms don’t listen much before we have a
written contract with them. Before that they don’t e.g. test their software
in our product program specific HW”.
• “If I get a good idea for a, say, script, I would send it via e-mail to
members of my own team, but not to [other Nokia sites in Finland or
abroad]. I mean if I would always distribute the best ideas, I would not
advance [get promoted, get bonuses, etc.]. In that sense information is
power.”
Portal system architecture
Web browser
RM
File Edit Locate View
Help
500
E
D
C
B
A
400
300
200
Help
Network Traffic
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
CM
Web server
Application
Server
Other
data
Mobile
device
Database
servers