How Do You Measure the Knowledge Management (KM) Maturity of Your Organization? Metrics That Assess an Organization s KM State - PDF

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 24
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Bills

Published:

Views: 5 | Pages: 24

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Related documents
Description
Hw D Yu Measure the Knwledge Management (KM) Maturity f Yur Organizatin? Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Rb Hss, KM Senir Prject Analyst, USAWC (717) Art Schlussel,
Transcript
Hw D Yu Measure the Knwledge Management (KM) Maturity f Yur Organizatin? Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Rb Hss, KM Senir Prject Analyst, USAWC (717) Art Schlussel, KM Senir Prject Analyst, USAWC (717) August 6, Intrductin Knwledge Management (KM) is the art f creating, rganizing, applying, and transferring knwledge t facilitate situatinal understanding and decisin making (FM 3.0, 2008). The degree t which an rganizatin effectively applies this art is an indicatr f its rganizatinal KM maturity. Measuring the state f KM maturity prvides the rganizatin a baseline frm which t build KM prficiency. Develping metrics that assess KM impact and value is bth essential and difficult. This is a tpic that has been studied, written abut, and debated, hwever we have fund little in the way f practical methds that are easy t understand and apply. This paper prvides practical ways t measure an rganizatin s KM state, and ways t measure KM initiatives and their impact. This paper explres practical ways t measure the KM state f an rganizatin, examines accepted KM initiatives used thrughut the KM cmmunity, and identifies useful metrics fr thse KM initiatives frm a military perspective. Civilian rganizatins will als benefit frm this apprach. Useful metrics are metrics that a Chief Knwledge Officer (CKO) r Knwledge Management Officer (KMO) can immediately apply t measure the state f KM at his/her rganizatin. 2. Metrics/Measures/Key Perfrmance Indicatrs Metrics, als knwn as measures r key perfrmance indicatrs are indicatrs fr assessing the effect f a particular prject r activity. The mst imprtant characteristic t cnsider when chsing r defining a KM perfrmance measure is whether the metric indicates if knwledge is being shared and used. Fr example, a metric fr a Best Practice database might be the number f times the database has been accessed. A large number f accesses r hits suggest that peple are reading the dcument, but this des nt definitively indicate whether it was useful t anyne r whether r nt it imprved peratinal efficiency r quality. A better metric wuld be t track database usage and ask a sampling f the users hw it helped them. (MCCES, 2005) Organizatins shuld measure what matters. Measuring fr the sake f measuring is fruitless and a waste f time. It is imprtant that measures and metrics be develped and cllected fr the purpse f cntinuus imprvement f knwledge management activities. (APQC, 2003) One methd is t cllect stries that explain metrics. Fr example telling a stry f hw KM imprved rganizatinal efficiency by explaining hw metrics were develped, cllected and analyzed is extremely valuable. After data is cllected, it is imprtant t pst the results and analyze them. When we can shw leaders and emplyees that KM Initiatives prduced results, this will result in greater buy-in t using thse initiatives. 3. Nt All Metrics are Useful Nt all Metrics are useful. Sme metrics dn t really tell yu anything useful and will lead an rganizatin t false results. This paper als lists metrics that shuld be avided s yu dn t fall int the trap f thinking these metrics tell me my KM initiative is successful. Here is an example: Time Savings is nt always a gd metric if it desn t lead t the emplyee using that saved time prductively. Typically time savings is calculated as (x hurs per emplyee saved) x (y # f \ emplyees) x (cst per hur). Here is hw leadership might respnd: Saving me 4.6 hurs f prductivity per emplyee per week means each emplyee gets Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 1 t duck ut f the ffice at nn n a Friday. Where s the tangible benefit? Unless yu shw me hw this leads t needing less unit resurces per task and therefre a reduced headcunt, I m nt ging t see any real savings. (Patel, 2009) 4. What Gets Measured Matters and Gets Dne Metrics are imprtant, because what gets measured, gets dne. Knwledge is an intangible asset, but the impact f KM is measurable. (APQC, 2003) Measures need t link t the rganizatin s strategy. Nte: A successful KM prgram usually invlves multiple KM initiatives. There needs t be a blended apprach using several f the KM initiatives listed in this paper plus ther KM initiatives that are imprtant t yur rganizatin. a. Metric Perfrmance Shuld be Cmpared t a Baseline r Benchmark Using metrics withut a standard (a benchmark r current level f perfrmance) r target (gal) is like driving a car withut a map and withut seeing the rad. Befre implementing any KM initiative, key metrics shuld be develped and a baseline established, against which perfrmance may be measured during and after implementatin. Even if metrics develpment ccurs after a KM initiative is underway, yu will still need a baseline t answer the cmmn questins: What kind f prgress are we making? When can we mve t the next phase? What d the users think? As a result, the first metric cllectins may be expressly t establish the critical baseline fr cmparisns. Hwever, d nt use the fact that yu lack a baseline as the reasn nt t use metrics. Many metrics prjects have stalled at precisely this pint in the face f the ptential effrt f establishing a baseline. (AKM, 2004) b. Knw What Yur Desired End-state Shuld be Befre Yu Begin Yur KM Initiative Yu shuld already knw what yur desired end-state will lk like befre yu begin a KM initiative. Why else wuld yu perfrm the wrk? Lk backwards frm that end-state t find the metrics and indicatrs that will tell yu when yu have arrived at the destinatin. Shuld the indicatrs increase r decrease, shuld they g up r dwn, shuld they be mre r less? Just as having a benchmark prvides yu a starting pint, having an end-state in mind gives yu a place t call success. 5. Cnsider the Culture When Yu Chse Yur Measures What type f culture d yu wrk in? Are metrics, measurement, and mnitring part f yur rganizatinal make-up? D yu already measure activities, cycle times, expenditures, etc? These questins shuld be cnsidered when develping ways t measure yur KM initiatives and the results f thse initiatives. If yur rganizatin already has measurement mechanisms in place try t integrate yur KM metrics int the existing system. Tying them t a system everyne already understands and is cmfrtable with will ease the pain f metrics gathering. If yur rganizatin des nt rutinely perfrm measurements cnsider ways t gather the metrics that wuld be mst palatable t the rganizatin. Can they be autmated, r dne as part f an existing prcess? Als, cnsider hw metrics shuld be reprted. Des yur rganizatin value statistics and charts, r des it favr stries and examples that cnvey the essence f the initiative. Finding the right fit fr capturing, analyzing, and reprting metrics is as imprtant as the KM initiative itself, because metrics cnvey the results f the resurces expended t achieve the desired end-state. 6. One Size Des Nt Fit All, But. A review f the KM metrics literature says that ne size KM des nt fit all rganizatins. Research reveals that there are cmmn KM initiatives that mst successful rganizatins with a KM prgram use. This paper lks at cmmn KM initiatives and metrics t measure thse KM initiatives. The KM initiatives listed in his paper are nt all inclusive. There are n guarantees that these measures are the mst apprpriate fr yur rganizatin. These metrics describe what yu can d, nt what yu must d r even shuld d. Select the KM initiatives and measures that matter t yur stakehlders. (DON, 2001) There are many mre additinal KM Initiatives that can als be used. See Appendix C fr mre KM initiatives. Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 2 The easiest measures can be attained frm prcess and IT applicatins, but just because we can easily btain metrics n a KM initiative, it desn t mean that metric prvides a useful way f measuring the maturity f that initiative. 7. Categrizing Measures Measures can be categrized as hard (dllar savings) and sft (intangible measures) 1. Hard (Dllar Saving Metrics) a. Prfitability/ increased revenue/ decrease in maintenance csts b. Dllars saved / cst reductin c. Time saved d. Quality imprvements, number f errrs avided, cst avidance e. Increased prductivity f. Successful missin g. Prducts successfully launched 2. Sft (Intangible Measures) a. Cst avidance b. Custmer satisfactin c. Quick prblem reslutin d. Prfessinal develpment e. Imprved emplyee satisfactin / Mrale imprvement f. Imprved knwledge retentin g. Capturing and retaining at-risk data h. Stries related t validated success i. Enhanced innvatin j. Imprved skills/cmpetency k. Trust 8. Cmmn Measures These measures can be used fr mst KM initiatives: Metrics mnitr the usefulness and respnsiveness f supprting technlgy. They give an indirect indicatin f knwledge sharing and reuse, but can highlight which assets are the mst ppular and any usability prblems that might exist and be limiting participatin. They are the easiest t cllect frm sftware system. Page visits Cntributins Number f members Metrics measure characteristics at the prject r task level, such as the effectiveness f lessns learned infrmatin t future peratins. Direct prcess utput fr users prvides a picture f the extent t which persnnel are drawn t actually using the knwledge system. Replies t discussins (nline, s, phne calls) Dcuments dwnladed and used Metrics cncern the impact f the KM prject r initiative n the verall rganizatin. They measure large-scale characteristics such as increased prductivity. (DON, 2001) Time, mney r lives saved Injuries prevented Changes in the way we d business Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 3 Examples: Number f dwnlads Number f site accesses Dwell time per page r sectin Usability survey Frequency f use Number f users Percentage f ttal emplyees using system (see Appendix A fr definitins) (MCCES, 2005) Usefulness surveys where users evaluate hw useful initiatives have been in helping them accmplish their bjectives Usage anecdtes where users describe (in quantitative terms) hw the initiative has cntributed t business Time, mney, r persnnel time saved as a result f implementing initiative Cst avidance as a result f implementing initiative Percentage f successful prgrams cmpared t thse befre KM implementatin Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 4 9. The Army Knwledge Management (AKM) Maturity Indicatr The AKM Maturity Indicatir, lcated n the next page, is a tl used t examine KM maturity frm an rganizatinal perspective. It will prvide an indicatin f where yur rganizatin stands n a maturity level befre yu start examining cmmn KM initiatives that prmte effective KM prgrams. a. The AKM Maturity Indicatr is used t determine an rganizatin s verall level f KM maturity relative t the adptin and use f the AKM Principles. b. The Indicatr is cmpsed f tw axis. c. The X axis (hrizntal) measures an rganizatin s adptin and use f the AKM Principles (Peple/Culture, Prcess and Technlgy) n a five pint scale ranging frm 1 t 5. d. The Y axis (vertical) applies the key elements f an integrated KM prgram (Culture, Strategy, Cmpetency and Metrics) against the AKM Principles acrss the maturity level spectrum. e. The AKM Principles are bth clr cded and typed in differing fnts in rder fr the user t easily determine which f the principles applies. f. The AKM Maturity Indicatr prvides an rganizatin a means t evaluate their verall state f KM maturity. g. An rganizatin can use the Indicatr t better understand the types f behavirs mre KM mature rganizatins exhibit. h. Check the bxes that apply t yur rganizatin. Mst wuld agree that changing an rganizatin s culture twards cllabratin and sharing is difficult. That is because changing the culture means changing behavirs. One can get a sense f where an rganizatin is culturally by bserving these behavirs: 1. A nt invented here attitude vs. a tendency t adpt gd ideas n matter where they were develped. 2. The knwledge seeking behavir f the staff. D they seek answers first and then invent answers if nne are fund, r d they invent first and tend t recreate the wheel? 3. D staff tend t think in terms f: a. Only thse wh need t knw get t knw. b. Wh needs t knw what I knw? c. I have a respnsibility t share what I knw s thers may find and use it. 4. D the rganizatin s leaders persnally participate in KM? a. D they value knwledge and innvatin r are they mre fcused n maintaining the status qu? b. D they persnally get invlved in KM activities r is that smething nly dne by the staff? c. D they shape perfrmance by asking questins in a way that prvides them understanding f hw the knwledge and infrmatin was btained and used t develp answers? d. Are emplyees rewarded r acknwledged in sme way fr demnstrating KM behavir? Are they penalized if they hard r withhld infrmatin? Understanding yur culture will fcus yur attentin n thse activities that will be accepted by the rganizatin, and will better prepare yu t create thse change management initiatives that will drive behavir change and increase the rganizatin s KM maturity. Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 5 Key Elements f an Integrated KM Prgram Culture What is the rganizatin's psture twards adpting and applying the AKM Principles? AKM Maturity Indicatr Hw is Yur Organizatin? AKM Principles: Peple/Culture / Prcess / Technlgy Knwledge is pwer attitude Little sharing ccurs Nt invented here mentality Change is discuraged s reside in sils Knwledge shared within parts f rg. Sharing is nt tab Prcess imprvements are cnsidered s begin t pen Knwledge sharing exists Sharing is encuraged Wrkers want efficient prcesses s balance access and penness Knwledge sharing is the rg. nrm Sharing is expected Wrkers seek & champin imprvements s use rbust search Knwledge shared is pwer attitude Sharing is rewarded Innvatin is encuraged s crss all bundaries Strategy Hw des the rganizatin implement the AKM Principles? N KM strategy r plan KM nt linked t rg. success Inefficient prcesses rule IT strategy nt linked t user s needs KM strategy emerging and aligning with rg. gals Prcess imprvement plan develping IT strategy cnsiders KM KM plans and gvernance mdel develping KM prcess assessments perfrmed IT & KM strategies are linked KM strategy tied t rg. strategy KM actin plan develped and implemented KM strategy drives IT strategy KM strategic plan in place and in use KM drives rg. success Efficient prcesses rule IT supprts wrkers needs Cmpetency Hw skilled is the rganizatin in applying the AKM Principles? N CKO/KMO Little grasp f KM cncepts and methds Unsure hw t encurage efficiencies Little KM tl training KM champins emerge Interest in KM training grwing Wrkers cnsider prcess imprvements KM tl use cnsidered KM champins lead initiatives KM Prs cmplete KM training curses Wrkers apply knwledge t imprve prcesses Tl usage rises CKO/KMO lead KM effrts KM training available fr all All wrkers seek imprvements KM tl usage rutine Org. leaders drive KM adptin and use KM training mandatry Cntinuus imprvements KM tl usage embedded in rg. Metrics Hw des the rganizatin measure the impact f applying the AKM Principles? KM is nt a factr in rg. success N metrics t assess KM impact Any existing metrics used t measure utput nt utcmes The need t measure KM is cnsidered KM metrics are used t baseline prcesses Metric tracking ptins cnsidered Metrics are cnsidered vital t KM adptin and use KM metrics are used t validate KM initiatives Metrics track usage and attitudes Metrics impact KM initiatives KM metrics drive prcess imprvements Metrics embedded in systems and tls KM impacts rg. success Metrics are part f KM strategy Metrics mstly measure KM utcmes and are leading indicatrs Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 6 10. Hw D Yu Measure the Maturity f Yur KM Initiatives? Use the table belw t determine the maturity f yur KM Initiatives. Each initiative has a scale frm 1 () t 5 (KM mature). Subjectively determine the maturity yur rganizatin has fr each KM initiative/activity. Circle the maturity n each initiative. If the initiative desn t apply t yur rganizatin, dn t use it. If yu want mre detail, apply weights t the initiatives that are mre imprtant t yur rganizatin. Cmmunities f Practice might be critical t sme rganizatins, but prtals might nt. Finding experts quickly might be critical t sme rganizatins, but nt t thers. Multiply the maturity level rating yu gave by the weight and place that # in the ttal clumn. Add up the ttals using the table belw. Divide by the number f initiatives yur rganizatin uses. This will give yu a rugh idea f the maturity f yur rganizatin. Hw D Yu Measure the Maturity f Yur KM Initiatives? Maturity Weight Ttal KM Initiatives Knwledge Management Prgram (Overall) Peple/Culture Culture f Cllabratin Cmmunities f Practice (CP) Face t Face/Brwn Bag Meetings Online Suggestin Bx Capture Knwledge f Key Retiring/Departing Emplyees Chief Knwledge Officer TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative Prcess Efficient Prcesses TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative Technlgy Repsitry/Cntent Management Search Expertise Lcatin Lessns Learned Management Best Practices Management Virtual Cllabratin fr Meetings TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative TBD Organizatinal KM Initiative Maturity Rating (Ttal divided by # f KM Initiatives) T custmize the mdel further, rganizatins can add ther KM initiatives they are using t the table. This list f KM initiatives is nt all inclusive. Many mre KM initiatives exist. Additinal space is prvided t add rganizatinal specific KM initiatives. Additinal infrmatin is listed in the Appendicies: Appendix A lists system metrics examples. Appendix B lists definitins. Appendix C lists additinal KM initiatives. Appendix D cntains a summary f KM measures. Appendix E lists additinal Army Knwledge Management resurces. Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 7 Metrics fr Evaluating yur KM Prgram: Nte: It is difficult fr a system t measure a KM prgram verall. Pssible system metric: % f ttal cmmunity that are active cntributrs (# f members/# f active cntributrs) t rg. prtal # f prject teams using KM initiatives/km appraches % f the number f emplyees actively participating in KM initiatives Reduce (n average) the number f instances f critical incidents due t failed prblem slving r knwledge lss (Patel, 2009) Imprvement in emplyee s skills KM initiative is part f the daily wrk prcess f the rganizatin Creatin f new knwledge/sharing knwledge/ transferring knwledge Emplyee engagement, custmer/stakehlder engagement, business prcess effectiveness a. Peple/Culture 1) Culture f Cllabratin Little sharing ccurs. Knwledge is pwer and sharing will threaten my jb/rating/salary. There is very little cllabratin r team wrk in the rganizatin. Mst wrkers are individual cntributrs, and are rewarded as such. Emplyees rutinely share what they discver, create and prduce. Emplyees rutinely ask themselves, Wh else needs t knw? A knwledge sharing culture and envirnment fr KM exists with rganizatinal alignment and is subject t perfrmance mnitring. Knwledge sharing is rewarded as there is an expectatin that cllabratin, knwledge transfer, and knwledge lss preventin is everyne's respnsibility. Nte: Difficult fr a system t track culture f sharing. Pssible systems metrics: % f ttal cmmunity that are active cntributrs (# f members/# f active cntributrs) t rg. prtal # f trip reprts psted % f emplyees that share (gathered in survey) Time, mney, r persnnel time saved as a result f sharing 2) Cmmunities f Practice (CP) N CPs Org has multiple, thriving CP that prduce results # f unique visitrs (nly useful if % is a high percentage f ttal user ppulatin) % f ttal cmmunity that are active cntributrs (# f members/# f active cntributrs) Metrics That Assess an Organizatin s KM State Page 8 Usefulness survey (users evaluate hw useful the cmmunity has been helping them accmplish their bjective) # f useful knwledge items passed n # f prblem slved # f back channel events (lunches, ne-n-ne meetings, hallway cmmunicatins) # f lives saved. # f useful CPs that cntribute t the missin f the rg. # f discu
Recommended
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x