Information technology
Contents
Definition
Comprises the elements of computing, including software, servers, networks and desktop computing, which enable digital information to be created, stored, used and shared.
Purpose & benefits
The appropriately implemented information technology (IT) can enable the KM program and activities of the organization. Information technology can make or break a KM program: if it is done well KM can be very successful, if it is done poorly KM will fail, but IT is not the only part of a KM program, it is an enabler only.
Description
IT refers to both hardware and software, it can be owned and operated by the organization or it can be cloud-based, whatever makes sense for the size and operations of the organization.
Variations
Implementation guide
Success factors
Common pitfalls
Silos Silos are created when too much emphasis is placed on a single activity whether it’s the Technology, People, or Process to the exclusion of the other two key success activities. For example, focusing on technology and ignoring the people and process part of the programme. Technology is easy to focus on, but it only addresses one of three keys to success. Developing and implementing people and process initiatives in conjunction with the technology will enable the success of the over-all initiative. By ignoring people and process activities, an organization will have another technology platform that is underutilized. To mitigate the risk of this occurring, it is important to have strong leadership and grassroots support for the initiative so that both management and front-line staff are involved and continue to be involved as the initiative moves forward. Both management and staff must recognize that it is important to maintain balance among People, Process, and Technology in order to be successful. For example, in the Environmental Company case study the organization had initially focused on the technology platform and had not involved users in the design and configuration activities. After 5-years they had a system that people did not like, and only used when absolutely necessary. After executing a reconfiguration of the system, which involved obtaining user input and feedback on how they wanted to use the technology, user adoption and acceptance increased 40 per cent in six months.
People/groups not participating There is always a risk of people/groups not participating, i.e. they will create their own local solutions or will just not participate and that they will continue in their less efficient and effective behaviours. Lack of participation also results in a sub-optimal solution being rolled out, having user input is critical to designing a solution that will be user-friendly, and address pain points helping rather than hindering people’s ability to do their jobs. A comprehensive management of change initiative will help to ensure that people and groups participate in the Knowledge Management programme. Management of change incorporates communication, education and training to help staff adapt to the new activities. Additionally, there are always early adopters and laggards. Sometimes people or groups will need to be re-prioritized until it is the right time to bring them on-board. For example, in the High Technology Company #1 case study, one of the teams within the ABC Business Unit was not interested in incorporating KM into their activities, they were satisfied with the application and processes that they had developed for themselves. Approximately 18 months after the initial rollout, this team's budget had been cut and they were now interested in participating in the Knowledge Management initiative. The Knowledge Management project / implementation team was able to leverage work that had been done with another similar team in another geography bringing the laggard team on board in less than a month with a solution they were more than happy to promote within the organization. If this team had been forced to implement the enterprise KM solution at the initial rollout, they would have become naysayers and detrimental to the programme. However, by waiting until they were ready to move to the new platform, they became one of the Knowledge Management programme’s biggest supporters.
Loss of momentum Loss of momentum occurs when the excitement, enthusiasm, and interest built up in the requirements phase of the project is lost due to delays in selecting and implementing the technology or otherwise moving forward with the KM initiative. At the early stages people are interested and involved, but it is easy for them to lose that focus and commitment /enthusiasm and transfer it to other initiatives. This loss of momentum can be mitigated through ensuring an adequate budget is committed to by management which supports the Knowledge Management initiative, and a comprehensive management of change1 plan is in place and being executed. Management of change can help communicate any changes in the planned implementation and rollout of KM activities. In the High Technology Company #1 case study, momentum was lost and regained several times through management and organizational changes. Each time management changed there was cycle of education and communication that the KM team had to execute in order to ensure KM continued to be integrated into the activities of the business unit. Implementation slowed during each education and communication cycle because staff were not sure they should put effort into an initiative that management may not support; they had to wait and see if the new management supported the program before they would participate.
Passion to lead KM Not identifying someone with the capacity, commitment and passion to lead the initiative. The KM initiative is not technically difficult but there are significant risks around how it is led, developed and implemented because people have to change their behaviours; facilitating/championing this change requires passion and commitment on the part of the leader. It needs to be someone who has credibility with both management and front-line workers. It also needs to be someone who is senior enough in the organization to have positional power, i.e. someone with influence and visibility. This is a difficult risk to mitigate. Certainly the Knowledge Management programme can move forward without someone in this role, however, true organizational success will only come when there is someone with the availability (see above) and passion to lead the initiative. There is the example included in the case studies of a professional services firm that had several national and international offices and was experiencing significant growth. They wanted to implement Knowledge Management before they got too big and it became overwhelmingly difficult. The partner who was the executive lead on the project was unavailable and had no passion for Knowledge Management; he just knew that he should be doing it. The Knowledge Management programme never got off the ground and the professional services firm’s growth sputtered and it continued to struggle with its knowledge. There is also the case study of the financial institution whose VP championed the Knowledge Management initiative, only to have the Knowledge Management initiative die when the VP moved on.
Link to the business case is lost Losing the link to the business case is a risk, especially when KM has been viewed as a quick fix for a problem or if a solid business reason for KM is not established. It is critical that the focus remains on solving the business issues that gave rise to this KM initiative in the first place. Losing that link will result in a lack of direction and potential failure of the initiative. To help mitigate this risk, it is important, in securing support to move to the collect phase, to select a business case that is critical enough and with enough visible impact within the organization that it will not diminish in importance over time. Back to the case study for the High Technology Company #1 where the critical business issue changed each year during the planning cycle. The Knowledge Management programme would get dangerously close to succeeding just to have its business case invalidated by a new, unrelated corporate objective and the KM team would have to scramble to realign the KM program to the new objective.
Organizational culture The culture of the organization can result in implementation issues and failure. The culture must be taken into consideration and factored into in the change management activities for the programme through communication, and rewards and recognition initiatives. The risks associated with the culture of the organization can be mitigated through a thorough analysis of the culture during the collect and analyse phase of the Knowledge Management initiative. It is during these early stages of the programme that an understanding of the culture becomes critical, to ensure success throughout the remaining phases. Using the High Technology Company #1 case study, once again, one of the other business units also tried implementing Knowledge Management. The KM programme team in that other business unit did not recognize and acknowledge the culture of sharing that existed amongst the different business disciplines and teams within their organization. This initiative, created silos of information as part of their document management system implementation: restricting access to information and documents only to the staff members they had identified as part of their initiative. Staff were frustrated with the technology and blamed it for their inability to share knowledge when really the fault was attributable to the configuration the KM programme team had chosen to implement. It did not take long for technologies that had a more open model to get a foothold in the organization, which led to the demise of the first technology.
Sponsorship There is a risk that sponsorship of the initiative will not be clear and directed. Should the programme lose its sponsorship or that sponsorship wane, the programme will be in jeopardy. It is important that people understand the management team supports and endorses the initiative. Like the risk identified above regarding availability and passion of the KM leader, this is a difficult risk to mitigate. Certainly the Knowledge Management programme can move forward without a sponsor, but, true organizational success will only come with the commitment of a sponsor who consistently promotes the KM initiative as opposed to limiting his/her involvement to providing funding. Again, the High Technology Company #1 case study provides an example where the management sponsor changed three times in 18 months. The Knowledge Management programme would just get the sponsor up to speed on the programme’s activities and expectations of the sponsor and someone new would take over. This resulted in chaos, confusion, and uncertainty among staff, which in turn slowed down implementation.
