Answers from the MAKE Award Winners

A Question for Tom Barfield of Accenture

 

How does your organization's KM model appropriate forward-looking information that might be picked up on your environmental scan (e.g., Obama's policy direction and implications for infrastructure investment)?

 

Tom Barfield: A key element of Accenture's marketing message is about delivering "High Performance."  Through Accenture's Institute for High Performance and Accenture's Research organization, we develop our point of view of what high performance means to the industries we serve, answering questions like "What does high performance mean to this industry?" and "How can Accenture help a company achieve high performance?"

 

This can only be done by taking into account changes in the business and economic environment.  One key program we are focused on right now is called C:Suite Imperatives.  Our leadership has identified four or five key themes that we believe are keeping our client leadership up at night.  These themes are largely driven by what is happening in the environment. We are now in the process of developing our points of view on each of these themes and baking them into our content and creating opportunities for our people to engage with this content and with each other.

 

A Question for Dan Nerison of Fluor

 

Did Fluor buy a third-party product for back end, or did they redevelop in-house as I know their current KO was developed in-house?

 

Dan Nerison: We originally purchased a third-party product in 1999, but have significantly redeveloped it in-house with over 40 releases in the past nine years.  We are now in the process of completely redesigning our back end, solely being developed in-house.

 

A Question for Dan Nerison of Fluor and Susan Rosenbaum of Schlumberger

 

What role does physical age play, according to the experiences at Schlumberger and Flour, in technology adoption? Or is it a nonissue?

 

Dan Nerison: For the most part it's a nonissue.  We have found that our senior employees may have a little more difficulty adapting to ever-changing technologies, but that this is more of a culture issue than a technology issue.  When they are used to doing things a certain way, they may struggle a little more with why it should be changed. Younger employees are much less encumbered in dealing with technology and are much less set in their ways.

 

New technologies can always be learned, but when new cultures are needed to implement technologies it can be challenging.  For example: If a senior expert uses only telephone and e-mail to collaborate, it can be a challenge to pull them into a forum to post expert answers globally. They have to be made aware of the value in doing so. Once you show them the value, they get it.  We have been quite successful in this because we placed so much emphasis early on changing the culture.

 

Susan Rosenbaum: I have noticed that a few of the more senior/mature employees are less apt to use social networking tools, particularly external social networking tools.  However, I have not seen an age-based behavior difference in the use of internal professional networking systems or tools.

 

Questions for Rory Chase of Teleos

What collaboration on the part of the KNOW network members works best when you are conducting the MAKE audit? (Is it a single individual or a task team of two or three employees to serve as contact, info source, and coordinator? Or...?)

 

Rory Chase: An internal coordinator--most often the head of the KM team--usually leads a MAKE audit. The MAKE audit can involve either the senior management team or a cross-section of employees. The senior management team MAKE audit is designed to help develop the organization's knowledge strategy. The cross-section of employees MAKE audit assists an organization to determine the acceptance--by job function, department, or region--of the organization's knowledge strategy.  The coordinator and his/her team helps to prepare the MAKE audit questions and ensure the highest level of internal responses.

 

My name is Fernanda from Banco Itaú in Brazil. First of all, congratulations, Mr. Chase, for the MAKE Award Program. I participated in the Global MAKE Conference in Brazil last year and will participate next year, and my company is participating in MAKE Award Brazil 2009.  My question is: How do you feel about MAKE award in South America? Do you think there will be the same success as in other countries given that Brazil still has very low-level KM development?

 

Rory Chase: Based on 11 years of MAKE experience, a country/region requires a critical number of knowledge-driven organizations before a national/regional MAKE study becomes meaningful.  A country requires 30 to 50 recognized knowledge-driven organizations before a MAKE study can begin.  At the South American regional level, at least 75 to 100 recognized knowledge-driven organizations would be required. Last year, Teleos investigated the possibility of conducting Brazilian and South American MAKE studies.  At that time, the number of Brazilian founded and headquartered recognized knowledge-driven organizations did not reach the minimum of 30 necessary to justify a MAKE study.  There were even fewer South American founded and headquartered organizations with recognized knowledge-driven capabilities.

 

Are there metrics that track the influence/importance of (1) face-to-face interaction (knowledge exchange) and (2) emerging technologies that leverage interaction (e.g., social computing)?

 

Rory Chase: I am not aware of any metrics that measure influence/importance of face-to-face interactions.  That said, almost all of the Global MAKE Winners encourage a combination of both face-to-face and virtual meetings. Organizations relying on just virtual meetings do not appear to achieve the maximum benefits of knowledge exchange compared to those that combine face-to-face and virtual.

 

There are tools for measuring the influence of social computing, such as social network analysis.  This technique identifies those individuals in the network with either expert or process knowledge. Most often, these individuals are knowledge workers and not managers. Social network analysis also helps organizations identify groups with deep knowledge--many times not visible to corporate headquarters (a critical issue in times of downsizing). Verna Allee, ValueNetworks.com, is a good resource for social network analysis.

 

Questions for All the MAKE Award Winners

 

Does the MAKE award directly enhance (1) internal senior management support for KM, and (2) external client assessments of your credibility/value [based upon MAKE's independent validation]?

 

Dan Nerison: Yes... absolutely.  But it all depends on how these awards are communicated to senior management and to clients.  On the Fluor KM Team, we are big on communications and use a combination of stories, newsletters, and presentations to get these messages across.  Especially during client presentations, we are very keen to always include a slide or two showing our accomplishments.  It's no longer a case of who is doing KM, but it's a case of who is doing it best.  Toot your horn!

 

Susan Rosenbaum: Winning the MAKE award helps emphasize to internal senior management the importance of the company's knowledge management activities.  I would not say that the senior management "requires" this recognition to know how important knowledge management is, as they see the results themselves, but it does provide an external affirmation of the important contribution of KM.  Schlumberger's clients are quite aware of our efforts in the area of knowledge management.

 

Tom Barfield: Senior management at Accenture values the MAKE award as it is really the only process available that we can use to compare ourselves to other companies from a knowledge-sharing perspective.  It is hard for me to state with absolute certainty what effect this has on my ability to develop support for future initiatives.

 

From a client perspective, the MAKE award is probably more of an influence on the client-facing knowledge management work that we do.  We have not used it broadly as a credential outside of knowledge management.  That said, I believe that our clients' perception of our ability to deliver and bring the best of Accenture to their business problems is a major influence on our inclusion in the MAKE award. 

 

Experts are forecasting a severe downturn in the energy around social networking in corporations due to the economic crisis. Do the presenters think this will be the case, and if so, will there be a difference between the MAKE Award winners and the rest of the world?

 

Dan Nerison: Disagree. Although downturns can create a negative environment within an organization, for those that stay, we typically see an increase in networking among them as they struggle to get their business back on track.  The net result is fewer people networking more. 

 

Downturns offer great opportunities to look at how an organization's social network structure and KM culture are performing (or not).  Companies should use downturns to prepare for the eventual upturn.  When it comes... will they do business just as they always have done? Or will they have learned from their mistakes and implemented real culture change? 

 

Susan Rosenbaum: I believe that companies with a strong knowledge management component will be better able to retain and utilize their key company/technical knowledge during the economic downturn.

 

Tom Barfield: I don't believe the economic downturn will have more of an impact on social networking in corporations than any other area.  I also believe that much can be accomplished in the social networking space without significant technology investment.  From a technology perspective, Microsoft SharePoint appears to continue to gain market share.  Knowing Microsoft, I wouldn't be surprised if their next version of SharePoint incorporates many more of the social networking capabilities that we see so much on the public Internet.  That may help to make these capabilities more accessible and less costly for companies.

 

There is a school of thought that KM is migrating to the business units and social technology is making enterprise-wide KM moot. What are your thoughts on that? 

 

Dan Nerison: Technology will never replace culture. At Fluor, everyone knows that our central social technology is Knowledge OnLine.  Creating an enterprise-wide culture and then supporting that culture with one technology is the key.

 

Susan Rosenbaum: I do not believe that enterprise-wide KM will ever be obsolete.  There are key parts of a company's knowledge, particularly technical knowledge, that are extremely relevant across business units.  It is critical that this knowledge be shared regardless of organizational boundaries.

 

Tom Barfield: It is always a challenge from a technology perspective that individual business units will make small investments, creating their own solutions.  I think, though, that the nature of social networking--which is about fostering the connections between people--lends itself to more of a centralized solution.  My recommendation is that, in most situations, an enterprise KM approach continues t0 make the most sense from a cost and effectiveness perspective.

 

Fluor and Schlumberger headquartered in the Houston area, near APQC...coincidence? :-)

 

Dan Nerison: No coincidence. Fluor is a global company that thinks globally.  For example, we were dialed-in from Southern California where the bulk of our KM Team is located. The only thing that matters about location is time-zone planning.