Knowledge retention - bridging knowledge

I was recently contracted to provide continuity of management for a soon to retire manager. My roles will be to complete one short-term project and provide interim management of another long term project. In essence, I’m providing a bridge of knowledge from the retiring employee to the new employee.

From a knowledge retention perspective my tasks are:

1) Learn all I can from the retiring employee,
2) Capture/ document key and salient items, and
3) Share/ transfer to the eventual long-term employee (hopefully hired soon).

At the first meeting, my first challenge became clear – identify “who” -- who are the contractors, stakeholders and end users. This includes contact information as well as insights on roles and expectations. Another task will be to identify documents and other resources and where they can be found.

While this position is important just to keep things running, this knowledge bridging will enable the new employee to get up to speed more rapidly

Knowldege retention - Proactive vs. recovery?

With high turnover and difficulty in replacing key employees, knowledge retention is becoming more and more important.

I classify knowledge retention efforts into three categories:

1) Proactive – as an everyday task, capturing knowledge on an continual basis
2) Salvage – When you know someone is going to leave, capture essential knowledge in the time allotted.
3) Recovery – Finding or reconstructing the needed knowledge afterward

In an ideal world being proactive would be the best. However, capturing knowledge takes time, effort, and resources. There’s a fine balance between the value of knowledge captured and resources required. Prioritization and most importantly an understanding of “mission critical” or “position critical” knowledge is a good place to start.

Knowledge management technology lesson in buying a TV

My wife and I went out to buy a new TV. This was a great example of the promise of technology vs. what’s truly needed. Our business requirements were pretty simple, we needed a new TV (even though our current 25 years old set is just fine) and I had watched the Bronco game on a friend’s high definition set, so high definition was a must. Other than that...

So we went off to our local appliance store. Here’s some impressions:

• The promise of technology - The first thing we saw was a wall of TVs of all shapes sizes. The size we were thinking of was too small for the wall and off in some corner. Should we get something bigger than our need?
• Technology outpacing current requirements – The first thing we heard of was 760 vs. 1080p (the higher the number, the greater the resolution). Reviews that we saw say you can’t see the difference in the size TV we may buy. Of course 1080p is the future and costs at least $100 more. Buy for now or the future?
• Newer technology – LCD vs. plasma – LCD is the newer technology and most manufacturers are moving toward it. It supposedly works better in variable light conditions. We were told that Plasma has better clarity for sports. LCD costs at least $100 more. Buy what’s hot or for one use?
• Features – We heard a ton about the different features as a way to differentiate the models. Some could do some very amazing things. Of course, I’m the person who uses my cell phone only to make phone calls.... Buy with features that aren’t in our requirements list but might be cool?
• User experience – After two days of technology investigations I began reading customer reviews. All rated the picture quality high. The reviews talked about operations issues such as poor sound quality, poor quality remote, and difficult to understand menu (i.e. can you actually use the TV?). The technical focus of picture quality wasn’t an issue to the majority. The satisfaction was related to the experience during use.

What TV did we buy? Well that’s a different question. I brought my research to management for the final decision.

The lesson here for knowledge management is that the latest and greatest technology may not be the best solution to satisfy your business needs. Whatever solution you chose is a balancing act between the technology (current and future), your needs and organizational culture. And of course, don’t forget to balance your checking account...

KM lesson - returing man to the moon

Picture this scenario: You’re in a rush to beat a competitor to achieve a very complicated goal. Tons of pressure is being applied to accomplish the goal first. You assemble the best of the best, and use a variety of large and small contractors to help you. After tons of trial and error, you complete it, have a huge success, win accolades, and then move on to another project. 35 years later, you’re asked to do the same thing without reinventing the wheel. Could you do it?

This is the case with NASA’s Ares project, taking man back to the moon 35 years after the fact. Weird Science did a great show titled space junkyard. It’s worth seeing from a knowledge management perspective.

A few points that were clear:
· In the rush and the pressure to accomplish, KM was not a priority.
· There was no central repository of all the files and data. Drawing still exist, but not the why (tacit knowledge) things were done that way was not captured.
· Much of the spacecraft was used in accomplishing the mission and remained in space. That’s why the junkyard is so important. NASA can reverse engineer some parts. The problem is they are working on final products, with no knowledge about the mistakes made along the way.
· Many of the contractors have gone out of business, their knowledge is gone.
· NASA engineers moved on to different projects or private companies soon after the mission. After 35 years, I’m sure most have long since retired.
· The problems and challenges remain the same and while there have been major advances in technology, the engineering is basically the same. In other words the same knowledge needed in 1969, is the knowledge needed today.

A Washington Post article describes the “Saga of the Lost Space Tapes.” The story gives another example about the missing lunar video tapes. They weren’t used much following the mission and for a variety of reasons (cumbersome, highly specialized format) were archived, moved, and eventually misplaced.

Can you blame NASA? Of course in hindsight people do, but at the time, in the rush of the space race, I’m sure 99.9% of us would be in the same place. What’s impressive to me is that NASA learned from this and has developed an excellent knowledge management program.

The Water Advice Network - Knowledge Retention

As a way to ensure the continued availability of knowledge from recently retired and part-time water professionals, I recently launched the Water Advice Network. I started out by signing up folks that I had worked closely with. In a short period of time, word spread and the network is quickly adding more and more top names from the water industry, worldwide. This includes the retired executive directors of the Awwa Research Foundation and his counterpart in Australia; directors from EPA, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and the state of Wisconsin; former chair of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council; highly respected consultants; and two retired VPs of major water utilities. I've also begun to add top researchers from major universities.

The individuals I've added to the network have an average of over 35 years experience and represent a huge wealth of knowledge that would be lost to the industry without this network. While they all want to stay involved, they are not interested in a full time or even a formal job, Their main interest is in sharing their knowledge. So in forming the network, my main goal is in making everything easy for them and also for utilities to tap their expertise. I handle the marketing, billing and other administrative matters. We accept credit cards and make the advisers available on a hourly basis. If you want only an hour of their time, that's fine. If you want something more, that's great too. We're not interested in long-term, large projects. That will be left to the big consulting firms. The services we will offer include:

· Advice – They’ve been there and can help you address difficult decisions. They can provide a second opinion or assist you in complying with regulations.
· Mentoring – Have an experienced professional as your personal mentor and only a phone call away.
· Document review – Obtain an independent, expert review of your plans, strategies and reports.
· Peer review – Bring in a team of independent, highly qualified experts to review your project or program.

Our first client is a very small utility and I was able to provide an international expert (recently retired) to assist them and their consultant. Both the utility and their consultant are benefiting from his wealth of knowledge and he's excited by sharing his knowledge.

To read more about the Water Advice Network, go to http://www.oxenfordconsulting.com/The_Water_Advice_Network.html.

KM and Business Continuity Planning

Last week I attended a two-day training program titled "Business Continuity Planning for Water and Wastewater Utilities: How to keep your utility in business and operating in times of crisis." I went to the workshop to determine if and how I can incorporate business continuity planning (BCP) into the KM work that I'm doing. My general conclusion was that a good BCP plan has components of KM and and good KM plan considers what to do in a time of crisis.

Business continuity planning considers what happens if... How do you keep your business running, continue to complete your mission and keep your people safe. What happens if you can't get back in to your facility for 24 hours, 30 days, or they are destroyed completely? Examples could be a fire, flood, hurricane, tornado or just a water pipe break? We even talked about pandemic flu which could reduce the available workforce by over 50%. How do you stay in business?

From a KM perspective, the issue becomes what critical knowledge do out need and how can you access it during a crisis. Is key knowledge accessible at an alternative location? Do multiple people have access to it? What people and skills (tacit knowledge) do you need and how do you get a hold of them. What happens if you don't have a computer, blackberry or cell phone? What happen if all your paper records are gone?

A good KM strategy needs to consider not only the knowledge you need to manage and use during normal business operations, but also during a crisis. By considering it upfront and as a component of your KM planning, you can save time, effort, and be ready in the event of an emergency.

Is this likely to be needed, let's hope not. However, toward the end of our session a tornado warning was issued and two of our classroom participants rushed out because a tornado touched down by their offices.

Knowledge Retention

Over the last few months I've heard more and more questions about knowledge retention and tying knowledge management to succession planning.

Myron Olstein in the report "Succession Planning for A Vital Workforce In The Information Age" (Awwa Research Foundation, 2005) stated that for drinking water utilities:

•Half of your workers will not be with you in 10 years
•Most of the useful operating knowledge will go with them
•EPRI report estimates that more than 80% of useful operating knowledge is tacit

These sentiments are being echoed throughout the water supply community, particularly by HR departments that are struggling to fill positions with qualified candidates.

This recognition has also spurred a lot of interest in purchasing systems to capture knowledge. The first question I'm often asked is what knowledge system should I purchase? While some knowledge systems are great, they should be last in your planning for knowledge capture. My recommendations are to:

• Identify what information do you need to capture?
• What can you do with existing processes and systems?
• What simple things can you do first to capture knowledge (people and process)
• What knowledge systems can support these activities? (technology)

Knowledge management planning should also not be done in a vacuum and should be integrated with business strategies and succession planning.

Website launched

To support my consulting business, I recently launched the website, www.oxenfordconsulting.com.

Check it out and let me know if you have any feedback.

Excellent example of change management

My church provided an excellent example of change management in building a new sanctuary. During the service yesterday we celebrated success and had an opportunity to reflect on our role in the change. Here's what happened:

In the spring of 2002 a congregation visioning meeting was held. There the concept of a new building was launched.

A steering committee from the congregation was formed.

In late 2003, a huge event was sponsored to launch the funding raising and to gain involvement.

During the construction, there were periodic symbolic events that took place to give each person an opportunity to feel part of the construction. For example, one Sunday each person was given a rock and then given the opportunity to place it in the foundation. Another time, people were invited in to sign the new beams. These are just two of many examples.

There were also numerous times when the plans for the buildings were shown during a service, with an opportunity to discuss in a small group after. I must have looked at these plans and added comments at least 10 times during the course of construction.

Yesterday, we were all reminded our role. As each step was announced, those that participated were asked to stand. 99% of the people in the church stood up. The few remaining were invited to join in and given ways they could get involved. Around me I could hear whispers of, "I was there," I did that."

The proof is in the demonstration. Here are some examples:
- 2700 people attend church on Sunday. Over 3200 people donated toward the project.
- Fund raising goals were far exceeded and people have volunteered to continue their giving even after they fulfilled their pledge.
- Construction is on schedule and will finish 6 years to the day after the visioning meeting.
- Most importantly everyone is excited and feels that they had a role this change.

Death by e-mail

I just watched the demise of an organization's leader after trying to pass a controversial reform via e-mail. This is the third time I've seen this happen.

While e-mail is a wonderful thing, it's not designed as a discussion tool for the following reasons:
- E-mail is one-way communication, not discussion.
- Written words and tone often get misinterpreted - 90% of communication is non-verbal
- Messages often cross in cyberspace, so you're commenting on proposal 1 while others are commenting on proposal 3.
- It's much easier to be negative when talking to a computer screen
- People don't read every word of an e-mail message (or at least I don't)
- Many important decision makers tune out when the flow of e-mails get too great.

My guidelines for e-mail are:
1) It's Ok to use to send out a proposal via e-mail
2) It's OK to accept comments (but don't assume that everyone read it)
3) Only respond to the comments by saying "thanks for your comments."
4) Compile the comments and have a face-to-face or conference call to discuss the controversial points.

Winning proposals

A few months ago I was on a committee to award a project. We had about five teams that could have easily done the job, what separated them was their ability to transfer knowledge. In the proposals and presentations a few quick things jumped out at me,

1) Proposals are a reflection of what you will produce. Examples that I didn't like were:
- Proposals that did not focus on the end product (more on this later)
- The first 20 pages were on the team (see comment above)
- Small things that made it difficult to read the proposals i.e. small font, colored boxes that hid the text, pamphlets and loose information that fell out.

2) During the presentations, the most important thing is that the reviewers like you and want to work with you.
- If you are a team, present as a team (often one person takes over the conversation too much)
- Don't try to oversell optional items. One team lost because they spent 60% of their time, saying we need this additional item.
- All of your team need to be strong presenters, not just the principals. The team I voted for had the best #3 person (the one who would do all the work).
- Prepare, prepare ....

Winning proposals is about who can best transfer knowledge, saying as clearly as possbile how you will best meet the requestors need.

In my consulting practice, I started working with teams preparing proposals. It's great to help technical experts. They know their subject area, but not necessarily transferring their knowledge into winning proposals.