Situation Analysis of the Case Study - Book Report/Review Example

Situation Analysis of QES P/L Executive Summary To, The CIO QES P/L The report analyses the current scenario of QES P/L and provides solutions for improving the usage of knowledge management systems in the company. The company wants to expand to other markets and in order to do so want to use the knowledge management systems effectively and efficiently. Currently, the company is facing with the low adoption of knowledge management systems, low usage of the Intranet and e-mail, no storage of the specialized knowledge, and cultural barriers in its subsidiary offices. Our team has observed the functioning of the organizations and has come with few solutions. Our suggestion is that IT and human resource department should implement a training program to all it’s employee to explain the functionalities of the knowledge management system. Change management initiatives must be done to make the user adopt a friendlier attitude towards the systems. In order to brand QES P/L as ‘Knowledge Management’ company, the company has to take steps to implement community of practice in the organization keeping in mind the cultural scenario of its subsidiary. Introduction There is a consensus in the business world that knowledge is an important factor that determines the competitive position of the firm (Brown and Duguid 1991; Drucker 1993).  Knowledge management consists of various processes and activities that help an organization to capture, store, create, use and transfer various experiences, information and insights. The mobilization of knowledge i.e. use and reuse of knowledge is particularly important for multinational corporations (MNC), who must maintain competitive advantages in an increasingly global marketplace (Ellis, 2000). In order to communicate efficiently between multiple units and respond quickly to problems, the formation of knowledge repository has become a primary goal for the organizations. The knowledge repository and database management improves and increases the capability development and minimize exposure to technological uncertainties by acquiring and exploiting knowledge developed by others (Grant and Baden-Fuller; 1995). Nevertheless, while knowledge mobilization is purported to be an important factor for MNCs to gain competitive advantage, its’ occurrence is not guaranteed. In general, the effectiveness of knowledge management activities and knowledge management systems is influenced by several organizational capabilities or factors (Gold et al, 2001). These factors are included in the organization’s structure, culture, processes, and technological capabilities. Culture, in particular, is central to a firm’s ability to manage its knowledge more effectively. These aspects are emphasized in our case study of QES P/L, a multinational company located in Norway, Australia, Hong Kong and Egypt. QES P/L is facing the problem of low adoption of knowledge management (KM) systems and other information technology (IT) systems. The movement of knowledge is constrained by the social and cultural contexts within which it is embedded. Thus, knowledge transfer, reuse, storage and creation is inhibited by the cultural norms and values of an organization. Thus, subsidiaries in various locations that may possess different organizational cultures, the issue of cultural context is extremely relevant to the conduct of effective knowledge management. Our team with project leader taking the initiative studied the case study of QES P/L and analyzed it. The idea is to use the concepts of soft system methodology (SSM) to analyse the problems in QES P/L. My role as a business analyst with some experience in KM systems helped the team to understand the problems clearly. Analysis Analysis 1: Problem situation The senior management especially the CIO wishes to brand QES P/L as a ‘KM’ company. To do so, they have to improve the use and storing of knowledge and have to implement more KM initiatives but are not sure as to how it will go about it. Although, there is a KM system in place in QES P/L, it is not being used to its full capability as it is limited to administrative purpose only. There is a low usage of the KM tools like intranet, enterprise portal, KM modules and e-mail. The ERP system which is integrated with the document handling system is old and incompatible with the newer systems that are being installed. The other KM technologies like list servers, groupware, knowledge repositories, database management and data warehousing and mining is not integrated properly with the ERP system. The organization is entering into new domains through expansion into markets like electrical substation. There is an uncertainty about the return of investment and whether the organization is equipped to handle such domains. The people using are uncertain about their actual benefits and in fact feel threatened about their jobs. The question also arises on how the various activities can be recorded. Traps The IT section of QES P/L is headed by the CIO who believed that implementing KM system will ensure knowledge storage and transfer. The management expected the implementation and usage of KM system to be a success which did not happen as per the expectation. However, the users (employees) perceived that KM system was more on providing technical support to the different groups of employee situated in different geographical location. The management did not implement change management initiatives to ensure that employees were acceptable to the idea of using knowledge management tools frequently. Various KM tools like portals, groupware, database management and data mining but failed to take into account the compatibility of these tools with their other systems. Roles The senior managements of QES P/L were the initiator who wanted that KM tools and systems be accepted and utilized in the organization. They are also the decision takers. They along with the CIO of the organization have a stake for successful utilization of the various systems. The employees are the problem owners. They belong to different domains and hence they lack understanding of how to utilize the KM systems efficiently for their domains. It is further compounded by the fact that their various offices are located in the different parts of the globe where the national culture may prove to be an inhibitor for the use of the KM system. Analysis 2: Culture One aspect of organizational culture is organizational structure. QES P/L is geographically distributed and hence organizational structure in one nation need not be successful in other nations. The organization is implementing organization structural changes. However, it has to design the organizational structure based on the national culture of the country in which they operate. That is why the matrix style of management of QES P/L which has been accepted by the Norwegian staff is not accepted with the Australian staff. QES P/L has been in the mining market for a long time and has around 600 employees who work in different technical domains. There objective is to provide quality projects to their clients. They are using KM systems for compilation of their projects but the full utilization of the various tools and benefits have yet to be taken. The organization does not have processes (another aspect of organizational culture) in place where the engineering drawings and various details concerning projects are stored. Therefore, the engineering staffs are not effectively using their time. The engineers and technical employees were also showing reluctance to using the KM system. Analysis 3: Politics The political scene of QES P/L is radical where the interests within the organization are contradictory and based on the specialized domains. The conflict within the organization is concentrated on the resistance of the employees to adapt to new systems. The employees are not empowered to provide suggestions during the design stage of KM systems. There are different types of users from engineers, technical staff, administrative staff and architects with different requirements and hence it was important that the requirements of each segment of users should have been taken into account. The management has implemented matrix form of organization structure without taking into account the attitudes of the employees. The management is unable to cope with uncertainty of the benefits of KM systems. The control of technology is restricted to the 7 employees who are not specialized in KM systems. The IT department also saw key personals leaving the organization and hence the moral of other employees is affected. Hence, the other employees feel that the systems will not be efficient. Discussion Based on our analysis, our team especially the project leader has provided solutions to make it easier for KM systems to adapted and used by the employees. Our recommendations are change management initiatives, culture focus, and formation of community of practice. Change Management Our team emphasizes on change management initiatives to make it possible for the users to adopt the KM systems. Adoption of KM system is filled with problems from both management and the employees. In change management, employee perspective is important for any system to function to its full capacity. Change management involves various processes that are implemented in structured way to reach a desired level. The basic concept is to unfreeze-change-refreeze where the mindset of the employees is challenged and then removed. The change is made where the new system or process is introduced and then new mindset is crystallized. Culture Culture comprises of two aspects: national culture and organizational culture. We felt that organizational culture coupled with national culture was responsible for resistance to change. National culture is defined as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another” (Hofstede; 1980). The members of a culture will have similar sets of preferences to view the world. Each country will have its own sets of beliefs and issues and ways of doing things and are analyzed through the five dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity and later on included team orientation (Hofstede and Bond; 1988) (Appendix 1). It is very important for multinational companies having subsidiary in different countries to taken into account organizational culture as it is nested within a national culture, and thus influences human resource practices and organizational behavior. Organizational culture is defined as a “pattern of shared basic assumptions that the groups has learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration” (see pg 12, (Schein 1985). The visible elements like structure, stories and spaces of the organization are the artifacts of its culture. The invisible dimension of the culture is found in core values and networks. Culture is a part of organizational life that influences the behavior, attitudes and overall effectiveness of employees and organization (Appendix 2). Organizational effectiveness is deeply embedded in the study of organizational behavior. QES P/L is influenced by two extreme national cultures and hence their organizational culture is also influenced. Norway and Australia has low power distance and high individualism but Egypt and Hong Kong have high power distance and low individualism. Egypt and Hong Kong have culture that gives high importance to skilled labors in this case, engineers and architects. The IT staff is tolerated because of the senior management’s inclination towards IT processes. Hence, it is very important that the management pays attention to the inhibition of the employees and address it. Community of practice Seeing that CIO wants to brand itself as KM organization, our suggestions is that it can start with having a community of practice that will help to retain all forms of knowledge that will later give them leverage in the mining community and other domains it needs to expand. Community of practice is one of the most popular concepts in knowledge management. It is defined as defined them as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on a ongoing basis" (Wenger, Snyder et al. 2002). According to Wegner, a community of practice defines itself along three dimensions (Wegner June 1998): joint enterprise, mutual engagements that bind members together and shared repertoire developed over time in the form of routines, sensibilities and artifacts. Community of practice has become very important in MNCs as it helps to form networks explore around for similar types of activities and it is believed to provide competitive advantage. Conclusion As a SSM analyst and business analyst, the proposal is to implement a regressive change management initiative that is focused on the KM tools and systems. During the team meeting, due to my experience in KM systems, I was able to provide feedback on the current scenario of low adoption of KM system. As a business analyst, I have seen that proper training with regards to the use of knowledge management modules is not given; hence, the user fails to adopt the system. Also, in my previous experience, I had seen that the requirements of users especially that of engineers and architects were not taken into account. Hence, the knowledge management initiatives were not successful. My recommendation is that user involvement is very important especially during design of KM systems and modules. This will not only help to encourage team spirit but will help to make it easier for training and adoption of the system. The specific and specialized knowledge of QES P/L is drawings in various templates and technical knowledge about the sewerage, oil rig construction and mining. These can be captured informally through formal communities of practice. Through communities of practice, the various specialized knowledge can be defined and segmented and stored in knowledge repositories that is accessible through the intranets accessible to engineers across borders. This will help the employees to get information of all types of documents, training materials, and other relevant documents. Companies like British Petroleum are encouraging community of practices, knowledge networks and effective KM systems. The presence of community practice and active use of knowledge management tools will help QES P/L to brand itself as a KM company. With the help of IT section Training manager along with KM Task Force Manager, change management initiatives can be implemented step by step. The training of skilled employees as to how to store their drawing and projects, search for existing drawings etc. has to be done over a duration of time. Appendix 1: National Culture dimensions Proposed by Hofstede (Ford and Chan 2002) Cultural Dimension Definition Power Distance (PDI) How inequalities are viewed and handled in the culture (i.e., strong hierarchical relationships versus egalitarian relationships). Individualism/Collectivism How individuals view themselves (e.g., are they an individual striving for individual goals or a part of a collective group, where group harmony is important?). Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) How accepting of uncertainty a culture is (i.e. it focuses on the level of tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity within the society - i.e. unstructured situations). Masculinity/Femininity How the culture values competitiveness/assertiveness (i.e., masculine traits) and cooperation/nurturing (i.e., feminine traits). Long Term Orientation This dimension accounts for people’s preference of time frame (i.e., do the people focus on long term goals or the more immediate, short term goals?). Appendix 2: Organizational Culture Reference Brown, J. and P. Duguid (1991). "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice; Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning and Innovation." Organization Science 2(1): 40–57. Drucker, P. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. New York, Harper Collins. Ellis, K. M. (2000). Strategic Contexts, Knowledge Flows, and the Competitiveness of MNCs: A Procedural Justice Approach, 10(1). Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., and Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, Summer, 18(1): 185-214. Schein, E. (1996). Three Cultures of Management: The Key to Organizational Learning. Sloan Management Review, 9-20. Schien, E. (1986). Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass. Wegner, E. C. (June 1998). Communities of Practice: Learning as a Social System. http://www.co-i-l.com/coil/knowledge-garden/cop/lss.shtml, Systems Thinker. Wegner, E. C. and W. M. Snyder (January-February 2000). "Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier." Harvard Business Review. The Rich Picture Read More