knowledge management
Using Knowledge
Management to Drive
Innovation
A Consortium Benchmarking Study
Kickoff Meeting
June 25, 2002
American Productivity & Quality Center
1
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Kickoff Meeting Agenda
• Welcome & Introductions
– APQC Project team and Sponsors
• Perspectives on KM and Innovation
– KM and Innovation framework
– Sponsor perspectives on KM and Innovation
– Issues to be addressed
• Review Study Methodology and Milestones
• Review of Best-Practice Partners
– Select Partners for site visits
• Develop Data Collection Tools
– Detailed Questionnaire
– Site Visit Guide
• Preparation for Site Visits
– Roles and Protocols
• Adjourn
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
2
knowledge management
Housekeeping
• Participants
roster
• Restrooms
• Phones
• A/C
• Your binder
3
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 1:
Welcome, Purpose, and
Introductions
(Project team, sponsors, and APQC)
4
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Using Knowledge Management
to Drive Innovation
Study Scope and Purpose
This study will focus on the practical steps
to transform an organization’s culture,
processes, and practices so that
knowledge creation and innovation are
enhanced and become part of work flow.
5
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Scope Areas to Address
1. Communicating the guiding principles,
objectives, and expected behaviors to support
knowledge creation and innovation
2. Fostering collaboration to create and share
new knowledge
3. Establishing support roles and structures
4. Engaging and advancing the learning and
training functions to support knowledge
creation and innovation
5. Identifying indicators of success and change 6
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Your Project Team
•
•
•
•
•
Lou Cataline, Project Manager
Darcy Lemons, Project Team Member
Kimberly Lopez, APQC Subject Matter Expert
Carla O’Dell, APQC Special Adviser
Dorothy Leonard, Special Adviser, Harvard
Business School
7
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Consortium Sponsors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Air Products & Chemicals
Boehringer-Ingelheim
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Canadian International
Development Agency
Cemex
Conoco
Department of Defense,
Canada
DuPont
Halliburton
Intel
KPMG
Petrobras S/A
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Siemens Medical
Sun Life Financial Canada
3M
TXU
UPS
U.S. Dept. of State
U.S. Navy
U.S. General Accounting
Office
U.S. National Security
Agency
Social Security
Administration
World Bank
Xerox
8
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Global Alliance Partners
• Knowledge Dynamics Initiative (KDI)
–A Japanese knowledge management organization (part of Fuji
Xerox, and well respected leaders)
–APQC has licensed our benchmarking methodology to KDI
–KDI is conducting the same project with its clients in Japan; we
will collaborate on results and conclusions
• Teleos
–UK-based knowledge management organization
–KDI has asked them to arrange European site visits
9
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Candidate Best-Practice Partners
APQC
KDI (Japan)
Teleos (Europe)
•Boeing Rocketdyne
•Hallmark
•Heineken
•Millennium
Pharmaceuticals
•NASA/JPL
•3M
•Wells Fargo
•World Bank
•Honda
•Eisai
•Japan Gortex
•Cap Gemini
•Unilever
•BP
•Siemens
10
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC’s Mission
To work with people in organizations around
the world to improve productivity and quality
by:
• discovering effective methods of
improvement,
• broadly disseminating our findings, and
• connecting individuals with one another
and with the knowledge they need to
improve.
11
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
We help organizations find and use
best practices through...
• Benchmarking
– Consortium Benchmarking Studies
– Customized Projects and Solutions
•
•
•
•
•
Training and conferences
Publications
Research and technical assistance
Information Services/Library
Networking
12
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC’s Work in KM
• Focus on KM since 1993: Nine consortia since 1995
– Over 220 firms in APQC’s KM Consortia
– 60+ Best-practice firms studied in detail
• Shared knowledge with thousands of KM practitioners
–
–
–
–
Publications and Conferences
Certified KM Practitioner
CoP Implementation Guide
E-learning
• Helping firms implement KM using best practices
• Creating the Knowledge Sharing Network For
Education (KSNE) and Industry (KSNi)
13
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC KM Consortium Studies
• Using Knowledge Management to Drive Innovation (June
25, 2002)
• Retaining Valuable Knowledge (2001)
• Managing Content and Knowledge (2001)
• Building and Sustaining Communities of Practice (2000)
• Successfully Implementing KM (1999-2000)
• Creating a Knowledge Sharing Culture (1998-99)
• Expanding Knowledge Externally (1998)
• Europe - The Learning Organisation & KM (1997)
• Using Information Technology for KM (1997)
• Emerging Best Practices in KM (1996)
14
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
KM Best-Practice Partners (1995-2001)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AMS
Apple Computer
Andersen
Accenture
AT&T
Best Buy
BP
BT
Broderbund Software
Buckman Laboratories 
Cap Gemini Ernst & Young
Chevron 
Cigna Property & Casualty
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Corning Incorporated
DaimlerChrysler AG
Dow Chemical
Ford Motor Company 
Gateway Computers
GE
Giant Eagle
HP Consulting 
IBM/Lotus 
Johnson Controls Inc.
Lotus Development Corp.
Manpower International
MITRE Corp.
Monsanto
Motorola
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nokia
National Semiconductor
Nortel
Northrop Grumman
Pink Elephant Group
PWC
Raytheon 
Schlumberger 
Sequent Computers
Siemens AG 
Skandia
Sollac
Symantec Corp.
TI
World Bank 
Xerox 
15
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC’s Road Map to KM Results
16
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC Resources in KM
• Information on our website (http://ksn.apqc.org)
• www.apqc.org/knowledge
– Briefings, white papers, overview of Stages,
surveys, presentations, publications
– Best-Practice Study Reports
• Training
• APQC KM Conferences
– Eighth conference May 2003 in Houston, TX
• Sign up to receive the monthly CenterView
• Call us (800-776-9676)
17
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 2:
Perspectives on KM and
Innovation
18
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
“Everything that can be
invented already has been.”
US Patent Office - 1899
19
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Innovation Defined
The embodiment, combination and/or synthesis of
knowledge into new and unique combinations.
• Examples include new or modified processes or
products, techniques, managerial tools, organizational
approaches, patents, licenses, and new business
models.
• These new knowledge-based products, processes, or
services increase the performance or competitiveness
of an organization.
20
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Invention and Innovation
Invention
Creating new
ideas
•“Creativity is the production of
novel and useful ideas in any
domain.”
Innovation
Putting ideas
into action
“Innovation is the successful
implementation of creative ideas
within an organization.”
-Prof. Teresa M. Amabile, Harvard Business School
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
21
knowledge management
Creating New Ideas
•
•
•
•
Invention
Understand unspoken customer needs
Create new marketspace
“Creative Destruction”
“Creative Abrasion”
22
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Types and Examples of Innovation
• Incremental Innovation – developing smaller
laptop computer
• Modular Innovation – analog phones to digital
phones
• Architectural Innovation – television cable
system to satellite system
• Radical Innovation – movie video to DVD
Source: KMWorld, June 2002, “Knowledge Management: a practical catalyst for innovation,” by Charlie Bixlar
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
23
knowledge management
Ability to Innovate
Innovation
• Examples abound:
– 3M - over 30 years of innovation
– Charles Schwab - investing is for everyone,
accessible and cheap
– Virgin Airlines- luxury in the sky
– Nokia- digital cellular phones
• Question will be: Can they do it again?
• Our focus will be on the role of knowledge and
processes that contribute to continuous innovation.
24
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Innovative Organizations have always
shared knowledge
Extent to which an Information Sharing Culture is
Cultivated to Encourage Employee Contribution of
Innovative Ideas
5
75%
6%
Extent
4
3
Sponsors
29%
2
1
Partners:
Partners
25%
53%
6%
0
0%
0 = Not Applicable
1 = To No Extent
5 = To a Significant Extent

3M

Black & Decker

GE Appliances

Hoechst
Celanese
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Percent of Companies
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
60%
70%
80%
APQCSony
NPD Study, 1997.

25
knowledge management
Knowledge Management
Systematic approaches to help
information and knowledge emerge and
flow to the right people at the right time
to create value.
26
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Innovation and Knowledge Management
• Process by which an entity is able to locate and
use shared knowledge, and create new
knowledge, for the express purpose of
stimulating the development of innovative
solutions
• Innovative solutions are solutions that
represent creative ideas (i.e., novel and
useful) that are implemented.
Source: Knowledge Reuse in the Radical Innovation Process
at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
27
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Linking KM and Innovation
Efficiency of
Innovation Process
Content
People
Process
Technology
Process
Innovation
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
New Product
Radical
Innovation
28
knowledge management
Creativity, Innovation and Knowledge
Charter an area of innovation
Form team
Select domain of opportunity
Create
insights
Knowledge
Generate
seed ideas
Ideabase
Creativity
Ideation
Analyze
Problem
Screen ideas/
Build concepts
Opportunity enhancement/initial business case
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
All rights
reserved
Gelb
Consulting
29
Group, Inc.
1997
knowledge management
Innovation Occurs at Three Levels
•Individual
•Group
•Organization
This study will primarily focus on how KM
principles and practices enable innovation
at the group and organization levels.
30
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
How KM Impacts Innovation at Three Levels
Content
Creativity
Learning
Self-Service
Collaboration Composition
Chartering
Chartering
K sharing
K sharing Team
and project mgt
skills
Codifying
Content
Archiving
managers
Collaboration & Work Flow
Project Tools
Common files
NPD process
and gates
Budgets
IT
infrastructure
Organization
Training
Mentoring
Interpersonal
skills
Technology
Individual
People/ Culture
Group
Process/
Approach
Leadership
Strategy
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
Email and other Contribution
self-service
rules
Taxonomy
Content mgt
31
knowledge management
Measurement
“Knowledge-based strategies start with the
strategy.”
“Knowledge-based strategies aren’t
strategies unless you can link them to
traditional measures of performance.”
Brook Manville, CKO and Customer Evangelist,
SABA
32
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
KM
Enablers
Balanced Scorecard for Measuring
the contribution of KM
Innovation
Behavior
Process
Results
Customer
Outcomes
Financial
Outcomes
33
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Innovation Process and Outcome Measures
Innovation Program Metrics
(process measures)
(measure program management
and control)
a. R&D Innovation Emphasis
Ratio
b. Innovation-Portfolio Mix
c. Process-Pipeline Flow
d. Innovation Revenues per
Employee
e. Speed to Market
Innovation Performance Metrics
(Outcome measures)
(measure growth and long-term
performance)
a. Return on Innovation
b. New Product Success Rate
(“Hit Rate”)
c. New Product Survival Rate
d. Cumulative New Product
Revenue and Profit
e. Growth Impact
Source: Measuring Your Return on Innovation by Thomas
Kuczmarski, Marketing Management, Spring 2000
34
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Challenges and results of the
sponsor screening survey
What you told us…..
35
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
What are the Knowledge-Related
Challenges for Innovation?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Time to Market
Creating a Supportive Environment and Culture
Access to Expert Knowledge
Boundary Spanning
Efficiency of Knowledge Worker Time
36
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
1. Time to Market
• Project teams and functions need to accelerate
their quality and rate of innovation. Time to
market often determines market share and
regaining the value of development.
– Wasting time reinventing the wheel hurts.
• Organizational amnesia or selective memory
– New people entering product development teams
need to come up to speed quickly and not repeat
past learnings.
• Enabling smarter decisions, faster.
37
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
2. Creating a Supportive Environment
• How can senior leadership communicate direction
and vision?
– Reinforce the value around sharing and using knowledge to
lead to innovation
• Enabling “Creative Abrasion” in groups
• Enabling and reinforcing collaborative behavior
• Providing resources to enable sharing and
innovation
– Time,money;
– people (“facilitators”);
– Process and technology
• Recruiting the right people and linking the right
people together
38
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Sponsors are Most Interested in Collaboration
Rank Order of Scope by Area of Interest to Sponsors
(1=most interested; 5=least interested)
Scope Areas
II. Fostering collaboration to create and share new knowledge
1.53
I. Communicating the guiding principles, objectives, and expected
behaviors to support knowledge creation and innovation
2.68
3.26
V. Examining indicators of success and change
IV. Advancing learning and training functions to support knowledge
creation and innovation
3.47
3.53
III. Establishing support roles and structures
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Average
n=19 39
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Virtual and Face-to-Face
Scope Area #2: Fostering Collaboration
Challenges/Limitations
11%
Other
Scope
Identifying effective knowledge management and information
technology tools
42%
63%
Exploring the involvement of communities of practice
Understanding how to engage and encourage participation of
various types and levels of people to share knowledge
74%
79%
Learning how to enhance virtual as well as face-to-face collaboration
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Average Percentage
n=19
40
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
3. Access to Expert Knowledge
• Experts need to share what they know
– It takes time to share knowledge.
– We know people won’t do it if it isn’t easy or embedded in
the way they work. How to embed it in their work flow?
– It must fit their culture.
• How to enhance the rewards for experts to
share?
– How to reduce the barriers of time and distance?
– How to provide resources?
41
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
4. Boundary Spanning
• Need knowledge sharing across traditional boundaries
– How can we help them share knowledge more effectively?
– How can we capture and share the new knowledge with the people
who need it?
– How to involve experts in the process?
• When people actively share knowledge within and across
boundaries, actionable knowledge results.
– R&D talking to market research and sales people
– Technical experts supporting field people
– Communities of practice around a body of knowledge, industry or
product
• How can that knowledge best flow back to R&D and NPD so
that new approaches, products and processes emerge?
42
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Sponsor Challenge:
Structural and Cultural Barriers
Scope Area #1: Communication
Challenges/Limitations
21%
Other
Creating the value proposition for
KM in technical and research
settings
Scope
37%
Understanding how leaders
support the adoption of new
behaviors
53%
79%
Addressing structural and
cultural barriers
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Average Percentage
n=19
43
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
5. Efficiency
• Highly-paid people are spending too much time
looking for information.
• Estimates in two of our past studies indicate up
to 20% of R&D or engineering time is spent
looking for existing information and knowledge.
• Can we manage content so that access is
easier and faster, for better results?
44
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Measure Impact of Knowledge Sharing
Scope Area #5: Indicators of Success and Change
Challenges/Limitations
5%
Scope
Other
Identifying measures of success for knowledge creation and
innovation
68%
Learning how to measure time saved and mistakes avoided through
reuse and sharing of knowledge
74%
Learning how to measure changes in the rate and value of
innovation resulting from increased knowledge sharing and
collaboration
79%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Average Percentage
n=19
45
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Where are you?
Stages of Sponsor Organizations With Regard to Using KM Principles To Drive Innovation
5%
Other
0%
Stages
Extensive implementation
53%
Initial implementation
Have developed a strategy or
framework
21%
26%
Just beginning
16%
No formal plan or approach
0%
20%
40%
60%
Average Percentage
80%
100%
n=19
46
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 3:
When Sparks Fly: Creativity and
Innovation in Teams
presented by Dorothy A. Leonard
William J. Abernathy Professor of
Business Administration
Harvard Business School
47
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
48
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Knowledge Assets
“Other resources, money or physical equipment, for instance,
do not confer any distinction. What does make a business
distinct and what is its peculiar resource is its ability to use
knowledge of all kinds – from scientific and technical
knowledge to social, economic, and managerial knowledge.
It is only in respect to knowledge that a business can be
distinct, can therefore produce something that has a value in
the market place.”
--- Peter F. Drucker, Managing for Results (1964), p. 5
(quoted in Morton F. Meltzer, Information: The Ultimate
Management Resource, 1981, p. 4)
49
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
What Constitutes A Core Capability?
• Interactive System of Knowledge Assets, Built Up
Over Time
• Not Readily Imitated/Transferred
• Both Content and Processes
AND
• Providing Competitive Advantage
50
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
Dorothy Leonard Wellsprings of Knowledge, 1998
PRESENT
Knowledge
Generating
and
Integrating
Activities
knowledge management
Creative
Problemsolving
INTERNAL
Importing
Knowledge
Core
Capabilities
Integrating
Internally
EXTERNAL
Experimenting
51
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
FUTURE
Dorothy Leonard Wellsprings of Knowledge, 1998
knowledge management
Fuel to Spark the Fire
• Creative Teams*
• Creative Process*
• Creative Culture and Environment*
*Dorothy Leonard & Walter Swap, When Sparks Fly: Igniting Creativity in Groups, Harvard Business School Press, 1999
52
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
©2002 Dorothy Leonard
knowledge management
Different Types of Development Teams
FM
Function
Manager
(FM)
FM
ENG MFG MKG
FM
FM
PM's
Assistants
FM
FM
FM
FM
FM
FM
FM
Market
ENG MFG MKG
ENG MFG MKG
ENG MFG MKG
Market
Concept
L
Working
Level
L
L
Liaison (L)
Project
Manager (PM)
C
Project
Leader (PL)
C
C
Core Team
Member (C)
PL
Area of
PM
Influence
Functional
Groups
Lightweight Project
Manager
Heavyweight Project
Leader and Team
Concept
C
C
C
Autonomous
Project Team
53
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
©2002 Dorothy Leonard
Matching Projects and Teams
Research and
Advanced
Development
Product Change
New Core
Product
Process Change
New Core
Process
Next
Generation
Process
Next Generation
Product
Addition to
Product Family
Add-ons and
Enhancements
Breakthrough
Autonomous
Platform
Heavy-weight
Derivative/Follow-on
Single Dept.
Upgrade
Lightweight
Sustaining
Incremental
Change
Functional
Diverse
Perspectives
Spur
Creativity!
knowledge management
55
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Creative Abrasion
Creative Abrasion is intellectual disagreement
that arises when people approach a problem or
innovation opportunity from different cognitive
perspectives.
These complementary perspectives derive from
different thinking styles and different
backgrounds and experience.
Creative Abrasion has to be managed for light—
not heat.
56
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Fuel to Spark the Fire
• Creative Teams
• Creative Process*
*Dorothy Leonard & Walter Swap, When Sparks Fly: Igniting Creativity in Groups, Harvard Business School Press, 1999
57
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Steps in the Creative Process
• 1. Selecting the right mix of people to spark
creativity
• 2. Identifying the problem needing novel ideas
• 3. Developing alternatives
• 4. Taking time to consider choices
• 5. Selecting one option
58
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
The Five Stages in the Creative Process*
5.
Convergence
Selecting
Options
4. Incubation
2.Innovation
Opportunity
3. Divergence:
Generating
Options
1. Preparation
*When Sparks Fly: Igniting Creativity in Groups
Dorothy Leonard and Walter Swap, Harvard Business School Press
59
1999
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Fuel to Spark the Fire
• Creative Teams*
• Creative Process*
• Creative Culture and Environment*
*Dorothy Leonard & Walter Swap, When Sparks Fly: Igniting Creativity in Groups, Harvard Business School Press, 1999
60
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Organizational “Skills”: Characteristics of Continuously
Renewing Organizations
1. Enthusiasm for knowledge and learning. People are curious and
they have a passion for learning in their work.
2. Drive to stay ahead in knowledge; to be on top of the field. Keeps
people listening and learning
– But is not the same as the ability to commercialize.
3. Tight coupling of complementary skill sets: link groups with
separate deep skills; don’t turn everyone into generalists. Manage
the interfaces.
4. Interactive and non-linear processes (circle back)
5. Higher-order learning: for every activity, ask “Why do we do this?”,
“What is the higher order learning and knowledge-building potential
of this action?”
6. Knowledgeable leaders at all levels
Source: Wellsprings of Knowledge, Leonard, 1995
61
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 4:
The Consortium
Benchmarking Study
Project timelines, key milestones,
and roles
62
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
APQC Consortium Benchmarking
Roles
• Subject Matter Expert – individual or
organization with expertise in the study topic
• Sponsors – customers who are funding and
directing the study
• “Best-practice” partners – organizations that are
selected based upon their stellar or innovative
practices
• Participants – both sponsors and “bestpractice” partner individuals who are involved in
the study
63
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Consortium Benchmarking
Methodology: The Big Picture
64
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Consortium Study Methodology
Conduct
Research
to ID
Potential
Partners
Kick-off Meeting
• Review Partners
• Develop Data
Collection Tools
• quantitative
• qualitative
Contact
Potential
Partners &
invite them
to join
study
Data Collection
Finalize Data
Collection Tools
• quantitative
• qualitative
• Collect Partner
Information
• Collect Sponsor
Information
Planning
•
•
•
•
•
Knowledge Transfer
Session
Final Report
Presentations
Q&A
Breakouts
Initial Action Planning
Analyze
• Key Findings
• Critical Success Factors
& Enablers
• Successful Practices
Analyzing
Site Visits
Write Case
Studies
Collecting
Reporting
65
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Sponsorship Roles
 Contribute questions and feedback for detailed
questionnaire and site visit guide
 Review partner profiles and vote on which to site visit
 Pilot detailed questionnaire (metric survey)
 Provide comparative data (via metric survey)
 Participate in site visits (facilitated by the APQC)
hosted at partner organizations
 Participate in a “Knowledge Transfer Session” at
the end of the study, featuring partner and SME
presentations, group discussions, and other activities
66
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Rules of the Game
•
Participating organizations agree to abide by the principles
addressed in the APQC Code of Conduct.
•
Adherence to the code of conduct will contribute to efficient,
effective, and ethical benchmarking.
– Participants agree to share information only within their own
companies, and only for the purposes of learning and
improvement.
– Participants agree NOT to use the material for commercial or
competitive use.
– Participants must be willing to share the same type and level of
information requested from other companies.
– See appendix in your meeting materials
67
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Benchmarking Timeline—Key Milestones
RESEARCH
KICK - OFF MEETING
April-June,
2002
SITE VISITS
KNOWLEDGE
TRANSFER
August-September
2002
June 25, 2002
December 11-12,
2002
68
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 5:
Review of Best-Practice
Partners
Select partners for site visits
69
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Candidate Site Visit Partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boeing Rocketdyne
Hallmark
Heineken
Millennium Pharmaceuticals
NASA/JPL
3M
Wells Fargo
World Bank
70
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Voting
• This study will have 5 site visits
• Instructions:
– Each company submits one ballot
– Your organization has 5 votes to cast for further
primary research
– Rank in order of choice, with 1 being most
desirable and 8 being least desirable
• The top 5 site visit selections will be our site
visit partners for the study.
71
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Partner Review: Boeing, Hallmark, Heineken, Millennium
Communication
Culture
Collaboration
Role &
Structure
Learning
Measures


N/A

Partner
BoeingRocketdyne
PROJECT TEAM

Hallmark Idea
Exchange





Heineken USA

0








Millennium
72
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Partner Review: NASA, 3M, Wells Fargo and World Bank
Communication
Culture
Collaboration
Role &
Structure
Learning
Measures
NASA





3M





Wells Fargo


1/2


World Bank





Partner
73
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Summary Table of Partner Evaluation
Partner
BoeingRocketdyne
PROJECT TEAM
Communication
Culture

Collaboration
Role &
Structure
Learning
Measures


N/A

Hallmark Idea
Exchange





Heineken USA

0








NASA





3M





Wells Fargo


1/2


World Bank




 74
Millennium
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Partner Overview – KM and Innovation
Institutionalized
Boeing: Rocketdyne
Division V3 Team
Hallmark
Millennium
3M
NASA/JPL
World Bank
Heineken
Wells Fargo
Emergent
Stage I
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
KM Maturity & Breadth
Stage V
75
knowledge management
Candidate Site Visit Partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boeing Rocketdyne
Hallmark
Heineken
Millennium Pharmaceuticals
NASA/JPL
3M
Wells Fargo
World Bank
76
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
KSN Innovation Community
Demonstration
77
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
78
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 6:
Develop Data Collection
Tools
79
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Two data collection tools
Detailed Questionnaire:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Quantitative
Closed-ended questions
Metric data
Written responses
.5 - 1.5 hours to complete
Sponsors & Partners
complete
Site Visit Guide:
Qualitative
Open-ended questions
Process information
On-site responses and
discussion
4 - 6 hours to complete
Partners only complete
80
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
When drafting questions, ask yourself:
“Do questions fall within the scope of this
study?”
“Are the major issues within the scope
addressed?”
“What value will this question add to the final
outcome of this study?”
“Is this a ‘nice to know’ or a ‘NEED TO KNOW’
question?”
“Are additional questions NEEDED for clarity
and more detail?”
81
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Finalize Data Collection Tools
• Break into 5 groups, one per focus area
• Review the sample questions in that focus
area
• Make changes as needed to ensure the
questions/issues you want are included
• Add questions
• Rotate to new focus area to ensure you have
a chance to address each one
82
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Scope Area 1
1. Communicating the guiding principles,
objectives, and expected behaviors to support
knowledge creation and innovation
•
Understanding how leaders support the adoption of
new behaviors
•
Even if firms don’t call it knowledge management, they
do KM to support innovation. How?
•
How do firms create the value proposition for KM in
technical and research settings
•
How to address the structural and cultural barriers
83
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Study Scope (continued)
2. Fostering collaboration to create and share
new knowledge
•
Understanding how to engage and encourage
participation of various types and levels of people,
including time-constrained experts
•
•
How do KM approaches need to be different in
technical settings, for geographically dispersed
groups, and for sharing across silos and
boundaries?
Learning how to enhance virtual as well as face-toface collaboration
84
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Study Scope (continued)
3. Establishing support roles and
structures
•
Identifying key leadership, community, and
individual roles
•
Engaging the participation of SMEs
•
How to support integration of knowledge sharing
into innovation work flows
•
Understanding the role of KM practitioners
85
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Study Scope (continued)
4. Engaging and advancing the learning and
training functions to support knowledge
creation and innovation
• Identifying the strategies to recruit and orient new
employees to support knowledge creation and
innovation
• Understanding the use of e-learning, on-the-job
training, and mentoring in knowledge creation and
innovation
86
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Study Scope (continued)
5. Identifying indicators of success and
change
• Identifying measures of success for knowledge creation
and innovation
• Learning how to measure time saved and mistakes
avoided through reuse and sharing of knowledge
• Learning how to measure changes in the rate and value
of innovation resulting from increased knowledge
sharing and collaboration
87
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
ACTION ITEM
We Need 5-6 volunteers!
 Review tools for content, flow, and clarity of
questions
 Determine if definitions need to be added
 Complete the Detailed Questionnaire (DQ)
 Determine length of time it takes to
complete DQ
 Report to APQC Team no later than one
week from receipt of draft tool
88
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Section 7:
Preparation for Site Visits
and Next Steps
Roles and Protocols
89
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Preparation for site visits
Project Team contacts Partner companies to
work with them to set up the site visit.
Project Team will prepare site visit packet to
distribute at meeting.

Includes site visit questions

Evaluation form to be emailed or
faxed back to the APQC team
90
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Preparation for site visits
 Project Team sends Sponsors logistical information
(hotel suggestions, transportation options, and maps to
designated site visit meeting place)
 Each company schedules their own site visit travel
arrangements
 Project Team provides names and the titles of Sponsors
to Partner host for security purposes. Partners have the
right to refuse to host any Sponsor organization.
 As site visit date approaches, Project Team keeps in
close contact with Sponsors
 KM and Innovation Community Pages
 E-mail
 Telephone
91
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Day of Site Visit
Project Team meets Sponsor group at
designated location
Arrive at arranged meeting place 15 minutes
prior to site visit
Go over roles
Dress is business professional unless
informed otherwise
92
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Day of Site Visit
 APQC facilitator opens meeting with introductions.
 APQC facilitator asks questions from Site Visit
Guide.
 Sponsors ask follow-up questions within the scope
of the study. You are also given time at the end of
the site visit to ask additional questions within the
scope of the study.
 Partner companies have the right to refuse to
answer any questions and to decline to host any
Sponsor.
93
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
After the Site Visit
Immediately after site visit, please
complete the evaluation form and e-mail
or fax it back to project team
APQC summarizes information in case
studies (included with the final report)
APQC sends summary to host for
approval
APQC makes edits for the final report
94
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Next Steps
• Summary:
– APQC Finalizes Data Collection Tools
– Pilot Detailed Questionnaire With Selected
Sponsor Companies
– Administer Detailed Questionnaire to
Sponsors & Partners
– Schedule Site Visits With Partners
– Conduct Site Visits with Partner Companies
– Analyze Data and Develop Final Report
– Conduct Knowledge Transfer Session
– KTS DATE: December 11th and 12th, 2002
95
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center
knowledge management
Contact Information
American Productivity & Quality Center
Houston, Texas
KM and Innovation Community Page:
http://ksn.apqc.org
Online Bookstore: www.store.apqc.org
Lou Cataline
APQC Collaborative Learning Group
123 N. Post Oak Ln., 3rd Floor
Houston, TX 77024
Telephone: (713)685-4656
E-mail: lcataline@apqc.org
Fax: (713)681-1179
Darcy Lemons
APQC Collaborative Learning Group
123 N. Post Oak Ln., 3rd Floor
Houston, TX 77024
Telephone: (713)685-7255
E-mail: dlemons@apqc.org
Fax: (713)681-1179
96
© 2002 American Productivity & Quality Center