Knowledge retention. Dr. Susanne Durs презентация

Содержание

Слайд 1KNOWLEDGE RETENTION BY ASSOC. DR. SUSANNE DURST SOUTH URAL STATE UNIVERSITY – 20

DECEMBER 2016


UNIVERSITY OF SKÖVDE – WWW.HIS.SE/EN

Слайд 2AGENDA
2
Knowledge retention




Слайд 3
KM should also involve activities related to knowledge retention
Knowledge retention

is defined as “maintaining, not losing, knowledge that exists in the minds of people (tacit, not easily documented) and knowing (experiential action manifesting in behavior) that is vital to the organization´s overall functioning” (Martins & Meyer, 2012, p. 80).
Knowledge retention “deals with cases where expert knowledge workers leave organizations after long periods of time” (Levy, 2011, p. 582).



BACKGROUND

3

Слайд 4
Delong (2004) assumes that knowledge retention consists of three activities which

are knowledge acquisition, storage and retrieval.
Acquisition is about the practices, processes, and routines used to move knowledge into state where it is kept available for future use.
Storage refers to processes and facilities used to keep knowledge and information until it is needed.
Retrieval is about behaviors, routines, and processes used to access and reuse information and knowledge in new situation.
If organizations fail to address this challenge, they may lose their capacity to act (worst case scenario)




BACKGROUND

4

Слайд 5WHAT IS CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE?
As not all knowledge is critical to organizations,

initial activities should strive for the determination of critical knowledge that is most at risk of being lost (De Long & Davenport, 2003).

Critical knowledge is more complex, abstract, and context dependent, so the knowledge to be retained is implicit or tacit (Delong, 2004).

Organizations have difficulties in specifying which specific knowledge and skills different individuals actually possess (Van Zolingen et al., 2001).

And: knowledge that is valuable today may hold little value tomorrow


5

Слайд 6
Lost knowledge costs are usually hidden
Leaders don’t know where the organization

is vulnerable
No one owns the problem of lost knowledge
There is no slack for knowledge-sharing activities
Management must do more than just capture knowledge (DeLong, 2004)
Also, time, other competing priorities, missing understanding of how to retain knowledge (Blankenship & Brueck, 2008) and lacking job satisfaction and talent management (Bessick & Naicker, 2013)

BARRIERS TO KNOWLEDGE RETENTION

15

Слайд 7SOME RESEARCH INSIGHTS

19

Слайд 8Aim
To increase our understanding of how SMEs retain critical knowledge.

Questions
How

is knowledge treated in the company?
How is critical knowledge retained?
What methods are applied in order to retain relevant knowledge?
How is knowledge shared in the company?




RESEARCH AIM AND QUESTIONS

20

Слайд 9Qualitative research approach

Semi-structured interviews
managing directors and other staff members of small

firms from Vorarlberg (Austria) operating in the building and construction industry
conducted in March 2014
with-in case and cross-case analysis of all interview transcripts for the identification of patterns

METHODOLOGY

21

Слайд 10“Knowledge is publicly available on the sites and thus it can

easily be copied” (MD3)

SM1 declared “manufacturing firms in other industries have relatively few factors that affect operations. In our industry, there are many different factors, why it is not possible to write down everything. There is mass production, whereas we have individual production or special production”.


FINDINGS – WHAT MAKES THE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION SECTOR SPECIAL WITH REGARD TO KNOWLEDGE


22

Слайд 11SM4 and MD3 claimed that knowledge retention helps in keeping knowledge

within the company and thus in not disclosing it to third parties.

MD5 described knowledge retention as "storage and easy retrieval of experiences and knowledge that are relevant to the company's success."

MD2 said that “it is the knowledge that is stored so that it can be found again.“



FINDINGS – WHAT IS MEANT BY KNOWLEDGE RETENTION?

23

Слайд 12As internal factors fluctuation and the retention of old ways of

doing things were named.

As external factors fast-paced developments in the industry, more elaborate and complex documentation, labor market’s development and lack of control in the industry were named.


FINDINGS – INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT MAY INFLUENCE KNOWLEDGE RETENTION

24

Слайд 13Knowledge is at least partially organized in the firms.

“This takes

place verbally, of course also by databases, but more often verbally“ (SM4).

“That what we develop in the company is in the computers, then it is filed on CDs and hard disks. Otherwise, there are talks every day or it happens just according to demand” (MD3).




FINDINGS - IS KNOWLEDGE COLLECTED AND ORGANIZED IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY?

25

Слайд 14Most interviewees stated that no financial losses were incurred.

SM2 mentioned

negative experiences because of the death of an employee. A loss of knowledge and know-how was the consequence.
It was also claimed that the company did not suffer any financial loss, as no jobs and customer relationships were lost. He also mentioned the massive effort needed to close the knowledge gap that had been created by the former employee.

MD3 mentioned a crash of the entire computer system a few years ago and spoke of the financial impact of € 12.000-15.000, it also resulted in a partial loss of knowledge.


FINDINGS – CONSEQUENCES OF KNOWLEDGE RETENTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT? I

26

Слайд 15MD2 reported a positive effect of knowledge loss: “Even if one

leaves the company without a malicious intent, such as a retirement, there is of course a certain amount of experience and knowledge loss. This does not mean that this is necessarily a bad thing. If an employee is longer there, many rely on him and for them it is then not necessary to think for themselves and to acquire knowledge. However, after he is gone, the remaining ones have to acquire knowledge on their own.”

FINDINGS – CONSEQUENCES OF KNOWLEDGE RETENTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT? II

27

Слайд 16"We are actually so small that knowledge more or less shares

itself, rather by talking. For entering new knowledge in databases we are too small. But usually we read something, talk about it and then pass it on. This is quite appropriate for our company size"(MD2).

The larger firms use more sophisticated systems: "As a rule, after each meeting written protocols are filed under a given data path. Then everyone can access the log under that path"(MD5).

SM4 declared “it’s just simply much faster to explain something to someone, than to write it down somewhere."





FINDINGS – KNOWLEDGE SHARING AS ESSENTIAL PART OF KNOWLEDGE RETENTION

28

Слайд 17Most respondents indicated that mutual communication by team members achieve the

best results.

SM1 pointed to the “Lesson Learned" method: “There are so many factors which you can never write down or which are not applicable one-to-one. This is why teamwork on the construction site is the most effective way.”

SM4 explained the effectiveness of conversations as follows: "Effectiveness is for me, if you can explain and give an example at the same time."





FINDINGS – EFFECTIVE METHODS FOR KNOWLEDGE SHARING I

29

Слайд 18MD3 specified his distrust towards electronic data storage. He said “emails

are too impersonal to me - it’s better if I can look someone in the eyes.”
SM3 stated that “it's just more pleasant to talk to someone, as to save the knowledge somewhere."
SM2 mentioned the use of smartphones. They are used “to serve as a contact point between the sites and the office.”
Company C5 uses a CRM system on tablet computers for their sales activities “to make the necessary data available with the least effort.” (MD5).
C2 and C5 employ retired former employees on a part time basis to have their knowledge available at a certain time.




FINDINGS – EFFECTIVE METHODS FOR KNOWLEDGE SHARING II

30

Слайд 19The findings show that the most common measures for knowledge retention

are data storage, personal communication and Lesson Learned approaches.

As regards negative consequences of missing knowledge retention activities, the participants are not willing to admit or unaware of the indirect costs, i.e. time and resources needed to reduce the knowledge gap, involved in knowledge loss.

As regards the industry, the challenge for any KM activities will be to find a proper trade-off between losing and retaining knowledge.




CONCLUSIONS I

31

Слайд 20From a theoretical point of view
the findings provide some fresh

insights into how smaller firms deal with the issue of knowledge retention; specifically in SMEs operating in the building and construction industry.

From a practical point of view
this study points out the need for firms to engage in activities related to knowledge retention to ensure the firm’s well-being.




CONCLUSIONS II

32

Слайд 21
Knowledge transfer




Слайд 22
The retention of critical knowledge, first requires a transfer.
According to Argote

and Ingram (2000), knowledge transfer in organizations “is the process through which one unit (e.g., group, department, or division) is affected by the experience of another” (p. 151).



BACKGROUND

22

Слайд 23
De Long and Davenport (2003) highlight five frequently used methods for

knowledge transfer and capture which are Interviews/Videotaping, Mentoring, Storytelling, Communities of Practice, and Training and Education.
Storytelling, mentoring and coaching are considered effective ways for transferring both implicit and tacit knowledge (Delong, 2004).


METHODS FOR KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

23

Слайд 24
Relational competence. This refers to the ability of a party to

initiate and maintain relationships (Hatak & Roessl, 2013). Hatak and Roessl (2013), who studied the relationship between relational competence and knowledge transfer in the context of intrafamily succession, showed a high correlation between the two aspects and also that this relationship is highly significant.

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE I

24

Слайд 25
Trust. It is argued that the transfer and sharing of knowledge

is facilitated by the existence of a trusting relationship between the persons concerned (Hislop, 2009).
Willingness to cooperate and participate. The study by Fong and Lee (2009) has indicated the meaning of colleagues’ preparedness to cooperate and participate in knowledge transfer processes.
Type of knowledge. Given the nature of different types of knowledge, explicit knowledge is easier to capture than tacit knowledge (Grant, 1996; Levy, 2011).


FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE II

25

Слайд 26
Common language. Without a common language, individuals “will neither understand nor

trust one another” (Davenport & Prusak, 1998, p. 98).
Culture. Culture is believed to be the main factor of putting knowledge management activities into action (Alavi et al., 2006). There is a need for a working environment that decreases attrition of high performing employees, given the close link between turnover and knowledge retention (Delong, 2004). A sharing culture should be strived for to reach the intended objectives.

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE III

26

Слайд 27
Management makes available resources and time for knowledge sharing activities. It’s

is not only about emphasising the relevance of knowledge management, it is primarily about creating space for activities related to KM (Van Zolingen et al., 2001) and providing access to resources supporting knowledge sharing activities (Fong & Lee, 2009).
Time. This may not only refer to the actual transfer process but to any preparatory measures as well. Additionally, studies have suggested that the process of elicitation takes longer than the process of encoding (Jackson, 2010).

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE IV

27

Слайд 28
Senior management directive. Studies have shown the critical link between management

commitment and implementation of knowledge management approaches (e.g. Alavi et al., 2006; Jackson, 2010).
Motivation. Knowledge transfer will also be influenced by the motivation of both the source and recipient (Szulanski, 2000; von Krogh et al., 2001).
Stickiness. The term refers to the difficulties encountered in the knowledge transfer process (Szulanski, 1996).

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE V

28

Слайд 29
Absorptive capacity. Despite high motivation, the individuals concerned may fail to

understand each other or express their tacit knowledge (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990).
Context. Any knowledge transfer (and retention activity) is expected to be facilitated by having involved the context surrounding the activities (Alavi & Leidner, 2001), as otherwise the danger of knowledge being lost is high.
Incentives. They may be needed to increase the individual’s willingness to contribute (Geisler, 2007).

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE VI

29

Слайд 30
Structure. Knowledge that is embedded in rules and routines has been

found to be less vulnerable in the case of turnover (Rao & Argote, 2006).
Work can be standardized. Research suggests that the standardization of work reduces the likelihood that turnover will have a negative effect on organization performance (Rao & Argote, 2006).
Characteristics of the task. Research suggests that similarity regarding the number of elements across the tasks increases the likelihood of transfer (Argote & Ingram, 2000).

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE VII

30

Слайд 31
Moving individuals. This activity is considered a suitable approach to facilitating

knowledge transfer. By this the individual concerned is not only able to acquire new explicit and tacit knowledge but also able to transfer both types of knowledge to new contexts (Argote & Ingram, 2000).

FACTORS PROMOTING THE RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE VIII

31

Слайд 32Knowledge loss




Слайд 33
Lost knowledge can occur at individual, group, or organizational levels, have

either anticipated or unanticipated effects, have tangible or intangible impacts and create immediate or delayed costs (DeLong, 2004).
DeLong further specifies five ways as to how lost knowledge can undermine organizational strategies:
a) Reduced capacity to innovate;
b) Ability to pursue growth strategies threatened;
c) Reduced efficiency undermines low-cost strategies;
d) Losing knowledge can give competitors an advantage;
e) Losing specific knowledge at the wrong time increases vulnerability.




BACKGROUND I

33

Слайд 34
In a recent study, Daghfous et al. (2013) identified as drivers

of knowledge loss, employee turnover, rushed reallocation of workforce, rushed handovers, heavy workloads, outsourcing, resistance to learning, and reluctance to share knowledge.




BACKGROUND II

34

Слайд 35
When it comes to the issue of knowledge loss, most firms

do not have a systematic approach and the approaches used are few, ad hoc and reactive (Daghfous et al., 2013).
In addition, despite the apparent meaning of employees (including managers) to organizations, it is still observable that workforce is considered as easily replaceable (Geisler, 2007).
Considering the demographic challenges ahead this proceeding is rather dangerous and organizations are requested to change their approach.



BACKGROUND III

35

Слайд 36SOME RESEARCH INSIGHTS

36

Слайд 37CENTRAL RESEARCH AIM


To obtain a better understanding of how a smaller

firm copes with the danger of knowledge loss caused by exit or long-term absence of employees/business partners

Focus on:
Identification of critical organization members and their relationships with other staff/partners in an German medium-sized business




Слайд 38RESEARCH DESIGN I


Strategy of inquiry
qualitative approach
Research method
Series of qualitative

interviews
Guided interview approach
Between April – June 2009
Unit of analysis
Key organization members



Слайд 39
Sampling
Criterion sampling
Long-term and/or experienced staff member
Working in a field

of perceived relevance to firm’s survivability
Data analysis
Approach by Miles and Huberman (1994)
Data reduction
Data display
Drawing and verifying conclusions


RESEARCH DESIGN II


Слайд 40CHARACTERISTICS OF THE COMPANY SURVEYED


Located in Germany
80 staff members


Designs and manufactures printing machines
Printing industry
- Permanent product improvements / innovations necessary
- Knowledge intensive sector










Слайд 41FINDINGS I


Identification of critical organization members
Small number of employees hold the

knowledge (Hofer & Charan, 1984)
- Interviewee G (R&D) / Interviewee E (Sales)
Use of external knowledge, e.g. construction firm, consultants,…

Слайд 42FINDINGS II


Collaboration among critical organization members
- Communication process is usually informal
-

Based on long-term and close collaboration
? Trust is key

Слайд 43
Effect of turnover and/or long-term absence
- Apparent knowledge gap
- Interviewee

G (R&D Director)
- Interviewee E (Sales Director)
- Problem at time of investigation:
Understaffed department: Service & Process Planning
Focus of consideration is primarily on internal members
? External partners seem to be neglected



FINDINGS III


Слайд 44RELATIONSHIP KNOWLEDGE MAP


Слайд 45
Study provides improved insights into how a medium-sized enterprise
copes with the

potential danger of knowledge loss
Organization members are aware of this danger. But: action is missing and focus on rather “obvious” persons
Knowledge map proposed as a diagnostic tool
shows relevant members (internal & external) and their relationships
existing knowledge and potential knowledge gaps can be identified
Knowledge management in smaller firms has to be discussed from a people-perspective rather than role-perspective


CONCLUSION I


Слайд 46
Implications for theory
Provides transparency needed to tackle the issue of knowledge

loss and its influence on smaller firm’s human, relational and financial capital

Implications for managerial practice
Creation of stronger awareness in terms of risks related to knowledge loss and their implications
Future research avenues
Inclusion of other staff members (broader perspective)
Large-scale study
similar companies (industry and/or structure)
Focus on other processes of KM e.g. storage and dissemination





CONCLUSION II


Похожие презентации

Методологии моделирования предметной области. Структурный анализ. (Тема 3) 671
Стиль руководства 1362
Менеджмент. Стратегия организации 462
Школа научного управления: Ф.У. Тейлор, Г. Форд 430
Особенности организации аутсорсинга на железнодорожном транспорте РФ 486
Внутренний аудит системы менеджмента качества (СМК) 393

Обратная связь

Если не удалось найти и скачать презентацию, Вы можете заказать его на нашем сайте. Мы постараемся найти нужный Вам материал и отправим по электронной почте. Не стесняйтесь обращаться к нам, если у вас возникли вопросы или пожелания:

Email: Нажмите что бы посмотреть 

Что такое ThePresentation.ru?

Это сайт презентаций, докладов, проектов, шаблонов в формате PowerPoint. Мы помогаем школьникам, студентам, учителям, преподавателям хранить и обмениваться учебными материалами с другими пользователями.

Для правообладателей

Яндекс.Метрика