Creating a Knowledge Sharing Culture Chapter 7 Creating a Knowledge Sharing Culture

Chapter Objectives Develop better understanding of organizational culture Key dimensions of different cultures Identify cultural enablers and obstacles of knowledge sharing Discuss relationship between organizational change and KM Identify major phases involved in initiating organizational change to attain KM goals

Organizational Culture Shared assumptions, beliefs, and values Assumptions are developed by employees as they learn to cope with work and environment Taken for granted, rarely spoken about publicly Indirectly influenced by reward system and other symbolic actions (what is given priority in budgeting process, etc.) Powerful unifying force Also powerful restraint on change Organization is embedded in larger social environment Microcultures may exist across organization

Typology of Cultures Solidarity Sociability High Low High Communal Culture Networked Culture Sociability Low Mercenary Culture Fragmented Culture Sociability - measure for friendliness - high sociability - people orientation, team orientation and process focus Solidarity - measure for task orientation - high solidarity - people work well together toward common goals despite personal conflicts

Typology of Cultures Communal Culture (Hsoc, Hsol) Task Driven Leaders are inspirational and charismatic Leaders may exhibit too much influence, members may not be vocal Networked Culture (Hsoc, Lsol) Members are treated as friends and family Wiling to help and share information People may be reluctant to criticize poor performance Mercenary Culture (Lsoc, Hsol) Focus on strict goals Little room for political cliques Poor performance not tolerated Fragmented Culture (Lsoc, Lsol) Sense of belonging and identification with organization is weak Commitment is to individual members Potential lack of cooperation

Analysis of Organizational Culture: Levels Artifacts Visible structures and processes Espoused values Conscious or stated strategies, goals and assumptions Basic assumptions and values Unconscious, taken for granted beliefs, thoughts and feelings These are source of values and action

Relationship Between Levels of Culture Artifacts Espoused Values Basic Underlying Assumptions

Link between Organizational Culture and Knowledge Sharing In-depth study of R&D dept of a high tech company (Gruber & Duxbury 2001) Barriers and enablers of explicit and tacit knowledge sharing Variables of openness, trust, top management support and the reward structure of the organization Interviewed 30 employees 8

How is explicit knowledge shared? Database (LotusNotes) 55% Intranet 40% Face to face* 28% Shared drive 25% * where is it? How do I get it? Who should I go see? types of questions 9

What makes it harder to share explicit knowledge? Hard to find on intranet 45% Hard to find in databases 38% Missing explanation for retrieval 25% Different systems – no standards 25% Information is not where it should be 25% Tools difficult to use 25% Difficult to access database 25% 10

How could you make it easier for people to share? Training for knowledge retrieval 60% Define a knowledge strategy Categorize in standard way 33% Standardize technology 33% Create project websites 25% 11

How is tacit knowledge shared? How shared? Face to face 90% Informal personal networks 25% What makes it harder? Attitude (knowledge is power) 45% Don’t know who expert is 33% Don’t know if the knowledge exists 33% Lose knowledge when people leave 25% 12

How could you make it easier to share tacit knowledge? Recognize the value of tacit know 33% Improve relationships within org 33% Increase opportunities for people within different parts of the org to interact 33% 13

What would your dept look like with a k-sharing culture? Communication and coordination between groups emphasized (45%) Experts would not shield knowledge (33%) Sharing of knowledge would be encouraged at all levels of the hierarchy (25%) The organization would value sharing knowledge (25%) Reward and recognition In corporate objectives 14

Wish list? Standardize on tools Increase the number of social events Workshops for knowledge sharing with experts and other groups State knowledge sharing as an org goal Enhance trust Increase communication across project 15

Conclusions Research shows that an environment that truly supports sharing of knowledge has the following characteristics: Reward structure – recognition for knowledge sharing with peers Openness/transparency – no hidden agendas Sharing supported– communication and coordination between groups Trust – shared objectives Top management support – upward & downward communication

Changing Organizational Culture Culture is resistant to change People resist change Change can be threatening Don’t see benefit from change Don’t feel ownership of change Knowledge sharing culture Knowledge sharing should be norm, not exception People must be encouraged to work together and rewarded for doing so Trust is key dimension

Three Myths about KM: Build it and they will come People rarely take the time to learn new tools Technology does not always give them what they want/need People often don’t know what knowledge they need Technology can replace face-to-face Only if you ignore valuable tacit knowledge First you have to create a learning culture It is very hard and takes a very long time to change culture - - focus on changing behaviours then culture 18

Maturity Models Good frameworks for understanding current culture of an organization And the stages of how change is introduced Can better identify the obstacles and enablers in order for the organization to attain the next level Diagnose current state of organization to understand how individuals will react to KM iniatives Helps to identify enablers and obstacles to required cultural changes 19

Stages of Organization Maturity Non-cohesive culture Decision making in-flight Leadership structure vague Operation model undefined Employees evaporating Multiple local cultures, leadership structures and operation models Local decision making Employee turnover high except in preferred classes of employees Similar local cultures Local decision making based on corporate strategy Local leadership linked to corporate leadership team Corporate operation model pushed down to local level Stable employee base Cohesive corporate culture and operation model Corporate strategy drives operational tactics Corporate leadership team coaches & empowers local leaders Employees recruited & retained based on strategic direction Culture adapts strategically Operation model changes dynamically based on environmental changes Professionals compete to work for corporation Chaotic Ad hoc Organized Managed Agile 20 20