System Development Process and Information System at Tata Steel - Essay Example

Tata Steel Consultant Report Table of Contents Introduction 2 Discussion 2 The McKinsey 7S Framework 5 Three-Perspective Theory 6 Contingency Theory 8 Conclusion and Recommendations 8 References 10 Introduction Tata Steel can be considered as one of the most prestigious, well-known and knowledge enterprises In Asia. The organization is popular for its effectively adopted and implemented knowledge management process. The organization is based in India. Tata Steel is the first ever organization that has adopted and implemented knowledge management strategy in the business operation process. Social, cultural and organizational issues are affecting the system development and knowledge management process of Tata Steel. The organization has adopted and implemented several knowledge management aspects, processes and strategies in the business operation process in order to maintain its leading and competitive position in Indian as well as global market place. However, the essay will discuss how social, cultural and organizational issues affected system development process and information system. In addition to this, the essay will also focus on the taken measures by Tata Steel in order to overcome the ongoing issues. Discussion Earlier, Tata Steel was only a general manufacturing organization. But, the organizational management has realised that there are internal issues that may affect the business performance of the organization (McGrath, 2003, p.31). The management of the organization purposely adopted knowledge management aspect in the organization operational process to overcome organizational, cultural and social issues. In terms of organizational issues, the management of the organization was only focusing on the centralization process and strict hierarchical structure. This aspect affected system development process as centralized organizational structure and culture affected the motivation aspect of both employees other important organizational stakeholders. It is true that, The management of Tata Steel has adopted several programmes and development processes regarding knowledge management, but lack of employee engagement before the KM process affected strategy development and decision making process (Griffiths, 2012, p.87). Inadequate workplace diversity also created issues for the management of the organization. Before the implementation of knowledge management system in organizational process, the management of Tata Steel found out some culture related issues in the management (Hobhm, 2004, p.18). The employees of the organization were self-centric and they did not feel free to share their views and knowledge with others. It actually affected the collaborative workplace performance of the organization. From the year 2000, the management of Tata Steel effectively and strongly integrated knowledge management strategies and processes in order to improve workplace as well as business operation performance (Wallace, 2007, p.87). In the year 2000, the management of Tata Steel redefined its old and traditional knowledge management process and strategy that brought pace in the strategy development and decision making process. The organization integrated the concept of technological advancement in business operation process (Stankosky, 2005, p.81). However, the used technology was not standardized and poor access to the technological applications affected the organizational operational process of Tata Steel. In addition to this, the management did not developed knowledge management strategies and problem solving strategies co0nsidering the short-term period. The management of the organization developed future and long-term oriented goals and processes. It created difficulty for the organizations to solve temporary and ongoing issues. However, these things can be considered as overall organizational issues that created barrier between effective organizational performance and positive business growth rate (Robertson, 2012, p.62). In terms of social and cultural problem, it can be discussed that lack of workplace diversity, inadequate collaborative workplace performance and lack of effective democratic leadership strategy affected the knowledge management process within the workplace of the organization. Employees of the organization were selfish enough to share their views due to inadequate democratic leadership style of the organizations (Buono, 2005, p.352). However, the organizational management of Tata Steel were lacking something to develop an effective KM implementation plan. It is clear from the provided case study that eight different aspects of a successful knowledge management process were overlooked between 1990 and 2000. These are connectivity, content, community, culture, co-operation, capacity, commerce and capital. The organizational management had the capability to capitalize on three aspects among the eight aspects, such as co-operation, culture and capital. Co-operation can be considered as one of the most important and effective aspect of a successful knowledge management process, which was missing initially between the year 1990 and 200. The management of Tata Steel failed to motivate each and every employee within the organization to work collaboratively (Muhl, 2003, p.189). It affected knowledge sharing and collaborative workplace performance aspect. Lack of workplace diversity and limited socio-cultural adoption actually affected the business operation and workplace performance of the organization to some extent due to the development of poor and ineffective knowledge management process. The McKinsey 7S framework can be included and implemented in this study in order to exami8ne the issues of Tata Steel in terms of system development process. The McKinsey 7S Framework This framework consists of seven frameworks, such as strategy, systems, structure, shared values, staff, style and skills. All the seven factors have been discussed with respect to Tata Steel. In terms of strategy, Tata Steel has implemented knowledge management process in operation process. Therefore, the organization is concerned for the technological development and use of advanced information technology. But, some internal issues are affecting the strategy implementation process. In terms of structure, Tata steel has developed centralized hierarchical structure in order to take control of each and every organizational decision making processes and other practices. In terms of system, poor employee engagement system may create huge problem for system development process ((Dalkir, 2013, p.42). In terms of shared values, self-centred orientation and high individuality can affect knowledge sharing and cultural diversity aspects. In terms of style, it is true that Tata Steel has developed autocratic leadership style as the employees are bound to maintain the hierarchical policies and regulations. In terms of staff, it is true that employees are highly capable. But, their high degree of individuality is affecting technological advancement and system development process ((Fuller, 2012, p.71). In terms of skills, low quality training process and limited numbers of development programmes are affecting the skill level of employees to enhance technological advancement in workplace. It is clear from above McKinsey framework that, some inadequate governance and monitoring of organizational leaders created difficulty for the organization to develop effective system development process (Koohang, 2008, p.77). Effective system development process can be considered as one of the important and integral parts of the knowledge management process. In terms of capacity, the management of the organization did not host knowledge management programmes and development processes frequently. It affected the overall orientation process. Poor governance of leaders generally reduced the capacity management within the system development of KM process. Poor access to technology and presence of in-advanced technological applications are the major reasons behind this contemporary system development failure. In terms of commerce and capital, it can be stated that Tata Steel is one of the most prestigious and highly valued organization (Barnes, 2002, p.48). Therefore, they somehow capitalized on these opportunities quite effectively. But, poor organizational and socio-cultural aspects within the workplace affected the development of effective and efficient system development process. The following three-perspective theory will help to examine the issues of Tata Steel in system development process. Three-Perspective Theory Three-Perspective theory proposed by Kappos, Rivard and Coopers can be applied and implemented to Tata Steel. Integration Differentiation Fragmentation Organizational Lack of integration of advanced technological applications and monitoring. Lack of organizational based consensus. Several types of Issue-centric attention and lack of consensus. Sub-cultural Lack of effective workplace culture diversity. Employees are introvert and self-centric to share their knowledge, views and differentiated thoughts. The sub-cultural boundaries are not fluctuating and uncertain. Individual High individuality and minimum culture integration. The entire workplace and employees are of multicultural backgrounds but they have limited knowledge and eagerness to enhance technological development. Lack of central identity of entire workforce due to low level skill development and technological advancement aspect. It is clear from the above three-perspective theory that Tata Steel has the potential but inadequacy and lack of cultural diversity can stop the organization to enhance better and effective system-development. Each and every employee follows self-centred orientation and self-awareness. It is actually hampering three perspectives of integration, differentiation and fragmentation considering the individual, organizational and socio-cultural aspects (April, 2004, p.19). The organizational management needs to employ cultural diversity and skill development programme in order to enhance better system development and information technological advancement process. Overlooking of these issues and aspects may hamper the overall knowledge management process of Tata Steel. Contingency Theory The contingency theory of knowledge management and skill development can be implemented in this essay in order to examine and address the ongoing issues (Babar, 2009, p.91). The contingency theory includes six elements, such as need, power, stability, cost, legitimacy and goals. The inadequacy of socio-cultural and organizational orientation within the workplace affected the need for collaborative performance of the organization. Each and every employee started to increase their social power instead of cultural and workplace diversity (Geisler, 2015, p.41). It affected the stability of the organization. In addition to this, the organization invested huge cost of amount behind technological development but poor access to the applications affected the system development process. Inadequate legitimacy is also the major reason behind these socio-cultural and organizational challenges. Last but not the least; absence of short-term goal and short-term orientation processes affected the effectiveness of knowledge management process and the establishment of system development process (Zeid, 2007, p.65). Conclusion and Recommendations It is clear from the above discussion and contingency theoretical concept that the management of Tata Steel was facing socio-cultural and organizational issues. It affected the knowledge management and system development process (Styhre, 2003, p.29). The organization implemented knowledge management process and redefined the strategy in the year 2000 in order to overcome the issues. First of all, the management of the organization organized different seminars regarding identification and recognition of a successful knowledge management process (Maier, 2007, p.23). It increased the level of understanding of the employees regarding knowledge management. McKinsey consultants were hired by the management of the organizations in order to increase the knowledge base and skill base of the employees of Tata Steel. Secondly, the management of organization tried to enhance effective communities of practices through the implementation of ethical KM training and development programmes (Rikowski, 2007, p.87). It has increased the morale and level of loyalty of the employees. In addition to this, it also increased motivation and quality of the knowledge repository of the employees of Tata Steel. Last but not the least; the management of the organization has developed PEP programme for management and employees to redesign organizational structure of Tata Steel (ICMR, 2003, p.10). It also helped to introduce of the performance management system of the organization to motivate employees and to overcome socio-cultural and organizational issues in the knowledge management process. References April, K., 2004. Knowledge management praxis. New Jersey: Pearson. Babar, A., 2009. Software Architecture knowledge management. London: Rowman & Littlefield. Barnes, S., 2002. Knowledge management systems. London: Routledge. Buono, A., 2005. Challenges and issues in knowledge management. London: Kogan Page. Dalkir, K., 2013. Knowledge Management in theory and Practice. London: Sage. Fuller, S., 2012. Knowledge management foundations. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Geisler, E., 2015. Principles of Knowledge management. London: Cambridge University Press. Griffiths, P., 2012. Knowledge management. London: Sage. Hobohm, H., 2004. Knowledge management. New York: Springer. ICMR., 2003. Knowledge Management at Tata Steel. Centre for Management Research, 1(1), p.10. Koohang, A., 2008. Knowledge management. London: Kogan Page. Maier, R., 2007. Knowledge management systems. London: Routledge. McGrath, F., 2003. European conference on KM. London: Routledge. Muhl, T., 2003. Knowledge management as strategic resource. New York: Oxford University Press. Rikowski, R., 2007. Knowledge management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Robertson, G., 2012. Applying knowledge management. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Stankosky, M., 2005. Creating the discipline of knowledge management. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Styhre, A., 2003. Understanding knowledge management. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Wallace, D., 2007. Knowledge management. New Jersey: Pearson. Zeid, A., 2009. Knowledge management and business strategies. New York: Springer. Read More