Category Archives: Information Technology

Building and Sustaining Agile Information Systems – Henry Stewart Talks

Posted on by
Reply

My presentation, Building and Sustaining Agile Information Systems, as part of the Strategic Issues in Information Technology: Challenges and Innovations series, is now available online. In this presentation, I discuss practical design guidelines for building and sustaining agile information systems and agile organizations. I focus on four key levers that need to be managed towards this end: information, knowledge, work, and technology.

Desouza, K.C. (2011), "Building and sustaining agile information systems", in Galliers, R.D.(. (ed.), Strategic Issues in Information Technology: Challenges and innovations, The Marketing & Management Collection, Henry Stewart Talks Ltd, London (online at http://hstalks.com/lib.php?t=HST120.2632_1_3&c=250)

Innovation Audit and Visit @ Delta Faucet Company

Posted on by
Reply

Next week, I will visit with executives, project managers, platform leaders, and employees at the Delta Faucet Company (Indianapolis, Indiana). I will be conducting an innovation audit, learning about innovation strategies employed by Delta Faucet, and making strategic recommendations on how to bolster the innovation quotient of the organization. Having just completed a book titled Intrapreneurship: Leveraging Ideas within the Organization, I am looking forward to using the models described in the book to study how ideas are generated, mobilized, advocated and screened for, experimented with, commercialized, diffused and implemented by the Delta Faucet Company.

Securing Intellectual Assets: Integrating the Knowledge and Innovation Dimensions

Posted on by
Reply

At long last, I have received information that my paper on Securing Intellectual Assets: Integrating the Knowledge and Innovation Dimensions will appear in International Journal of Technology Management (Vol. 54, No. 2/3, 2011).

Abstract: The concept of intellectual asset security has received widespread attention in recent times. Much of this attention can be attributed to the fact that knowledge assets can be used to secure competitive advantages for organisations. Moreover, one might assert that in today’s knowledge-based economies and markets, it is these assets that truly differentiate organisations and are the only true source of sustainable competitive advantages. In order to have a robust program for managing intellectual assets, an organisation must account for its knowledge management and innovation processes. In this paper, drawing on 1) a semiotic-based model for knowledge management (Desouza, 2006), and 2) an organisational process of innovation (Desouza et al., 2006), the author describes an integrated process framework for the management of intellectual assets. The framework is then used to describe salient security management challenges faced when managing intellectual assets. Executives involved in security management programs in 23 organisations were interviewed to elicit key security management challenges faced by organisations when addressing intellectual assets. The concept of intellectual asset security has received widespread attention in recent times. Much of this attention can be attributed to the fact that knowledge assets can be used to secure competitive advantages for organisations. Moreover, one might assert that in today’s knowledge-based economies and markets, it is these assets that truly differentiate organisations and are the only true source of sustainable competitive advantages. In order to have a robust program for managing intellectual assets, an organisation mustaccount for its knowledge management and innovation processes. In this paper,drawing on1 a semiotic-based model for knowledge management (Desouza, 2006)2 an organisational process of innovation (Desouza et al., 2006), the author describes an integrated process framework for the management ofintellectual assets. The framework is then used to describe salient security management challenges faced when managing intellectual assets. Executivesinvolved in security management programs in 23 organisations were interviewed to elicit key security management challenges faced byorganisations when addressing intellectual assets.

Towards Evidence-Driven Policy Design to Appear in The Innovation Journal

Posted on by
Reply

My paper co-authored with Yuan Lin, Towards Evidence-Driven Policy Design:  Complex Adaptive Systems and Computational Modeling, will appear in The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal.

Finally, A Majority of Executives Embrace Experimentation: HBR Blog

Posted on by
2

My second post on the Harvard Business Review site went live today! The post was written in collaboration with H. James Wilson and is titled, Finally, A Majority of Executives Embrace Experimentation. The post outlines the value proposition of building an experimentation culture within organizations and how executives can support employee experimentation.

The post has been picked up by Bloomberg Businessweek as well.

We would love to hear your comments on the ideas presented.

Towards Evidence-Driven Policy Design: Complex Adaptive Systems and Computational Modeling

Posted on by
1

Along with my doctoral student, Yuan Lin, I have co-authored an article that describes how we might move towards evidence-driven policy design. This article draws from the keynote that I have at the 2010 Computational Social Science Society Conference.

Efforts to design public policies for social systems tend to confront highly complex conditions which have a large number of potentially relevant factors to be considered and rapidly changing conditions where continuous adaptation delays or obscures the effect of policies. Given unresolvable uncertainty in policy outcomes, the optimal solution is difficult, if ever possible, to nail down. It is more reasonable to choose a solution that is robust to as many future scenarios that might ensue from the decision. Arriving at such a solution requires policy makers to actively explore and exploit rich information to support their decision making in a cost-efficient, yet rigorous manner. We name this new working style as evidence-driven policy design and outline the characteristics of favorable evidence. We then argue that computational modeling is a potential tool for implementing evidence-driven policy design. It helps the study and design of solutions by simulating various environments, interventions, and the processes in which certain outcomes emerge from the decisions of policy makers. It allows policy makers to observe both the intended and, equally important, unintended consequences of policy alternatives. It also facilitates communication and consensus-building among policy makers and diverse stakeholders.

Deploying IT for Organizational Innovation: Lessons from Case Studies

Posted on by
Reply

Along with several colleagues, Jaka Lindic (University of Ljubljana), Peter Baloh (BISOL, d.o.o), and Vincent Ribière (The Institute for Knowledge and Innovation (IKI-SEA), Bangkok University), I co-authored a paper for the International Journal of Information Management.

Organizations must innovate if they are to survive in today’s fiercely competitive marketplace. In this paper, we explore how leading organizations are using emerging technologies to enable novel forms of ideation that can radically increase the sheer volume of ideas they explore. In addition, we outline how organizations use technologies to cost effectively manage this increased volume of ideas by optimizing generation, mobilization, advocacy and screening, experimentation, commercialization, and even the diffusion and implementation of ideas. Critical to this is the management of knowledge during the innovation process.

Lindic, J., Baloh, P., Ribière, V.M., and Desouza, K.C. “Deploying Information Technologies for Organizational Innovation: Lessons from Case Studies,” International Journal of Information Management, Forthcoming.

What kind of a management consultant are you?

Posted on by
25

On a fairly regular basis, I am asked, “What kind of a consultant are you, Kevin?” I admit that my typical response has been to take the easy road by responding, “It depends.” For the last several weeks, I have begun to think more creatively on the nature, type, and roles of management consultants in organizations. I have served in various capacities as a consultant to a myriad of organizations; reflecting on what I do in the various situations can only help me get better. During these reflections, I have come to the realization that there are archetypes of management consultants.

Lawyers: Management consultants often are called in to act as lawyers. These engagements occur when an organization is need of specialized, strategic, decision-making advice. When done correctly, the consultants are called in to help an organization evaluate strategic options before they choose a major course of action. When done incorrectly, consultants are called in to help mitigate damage from actions, or even to address public relations disasters.

Engineers: One of the most popular role for management consultants is that of an ‘engineers.’ Most graduates take on this position as their first job after completion of their  studies. In this role, the consultant helps an organization to ‘build’ something, most commonly an information technology solution or a human resource process. The management consultant builds a new organizational artifact and helps an organization make it a part of its operational fabric.

Designers:  Consultants who act as designers, or architects, oversee the work of engineers who might later build something. Designers are involved in the process of architecting organizational re-designs, system integrations, and even process improvement projects. The major element that differentiates designers from engineers is that designers need to have broad knowledge about the business and industry in which the organization operates. Engineers, on the other hand, have deeper knowledge about their particular too lsets.

Doctors: There are management consultants who are called upon to work as doctors. They deal with specific organizational problems, when management knows that either 1) the organization needs a routine check-up, or 2) the organization is suffering from an ailment and needs a medication (fix) to remedy the situation. Management consultants that work as doctors have deep knowledge within specific domains and are often experts in these spaces. Doctor-like management consultants are common for issues such as employee morale boosting, global innovation team management, or assisting in managing organizational change programs.

Artists: The most eclectic of management consultants function as artists. These individuals bring innovation into an organization. They bring new ideas that the organization did not know were there and are meant to stimulate fresh thinking and reflection. Like Picasso or van Gogh, artists rarely come up with creations to meet specific needs of an organization. It is more common for organizations to recognize the value of their work and then bring their ideas into the organization. Like hanging a painting on the wall, the ideas are meant to stimulate the organization to fresh and invigorated thinking.

Coaches: Management consultants who have a track record of working with senior executives and organizational leaders are often called upon to take on the role of coach. This also happens to be my favorite role as a consultant.  In this role, the coach serves as a confidant and mentor to an executive. Executives use their coach to help them improve their skills (from building effective business plans to creating effective teams).  In turn, the coach puts executives through a series of "exercises" to train them on how to become effective leaders.

How do you feel about this classification scheme? Have I missed any other types of consultants? What kind of management consultant do you want to be and why?

Innovation Reflections from Thailand

Posted on by
2

I just returned from a wonderful trip to Thailand. During my visit, I had an opportunity to give a talk at Bangkok University on Designing the Innovation Process. The talk was sponsored by the Institute for Knowledge and Innovation - South East Asia and Thailand's National Innovation Agency (NIA). During the event, I had a chance to dialogue with over 60 distinguished managers and executives who represented Thailand's leading private and public sector organizations. I had the opportunity to discuss research collaboration with the Thailand Productivity Institute, and Bangkok University, among other organizations. It was a real treat to meet University of Washington alumni in Thailand.

I was impressed by the breadth of knowledge management programs in various Thai organizations. In addition, I learnt how Thai organizations are tailoring standard knowledge management approaches to meet the cultural and economic realities of the country. Thailand is an up and coming Asian economy. While, still highly dependent on tourism, the Thai government, through agencies such as the NIA, are supporting the development of innovative and highly entrepreneurial organizations in areas such as green technologies, and biofuel, among others.

My host, Dr. Vincent M. Ribière, did a marvellous job organizing the event. I look forward to my return trip back to Thailand!




Interview with KM Leaders: Stan Garfield

Posted on by
Reply

I am currently interviewing an eclectic group of knowledge management leaders on their experiences. These interviews will appear in my new book on knowledge management. Here is an excerpt from my interview with Stan Garfield. I first met Stan Garfield at the APQC Conference in St. Louis in 2005. I was immediately impressed with his depth of knowledge and experience. He invited me to give a talk to his knowledge management community of practice soon after. Through the years, I have kept abreast of his work in the knowledge management field. Through this interview, I am hoping that you will gain an appreciation of what it takes to be a KM leader.

Current Title and Organization: Community Evangelist, Global Consulting Knowledge Management, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited

Biography: Mr. Garfield began as a computer programmer, research assistant, and manager at Washington University School of Medicine and St. Louis University from 1975-1983. He then moved to Digital Equipment Corporation (later, Compaq and HP) and held a wide variety of field and headquarters management roles in presales, consulting and system integration. Among his many achievements, he launched DEC’s first knowledge management program in 1996, helped develop the corporate KM strategy for Compaq in 2000, and led the Worldwide Consulting & Integration Knowledge Management Program for Hewlett-Packard, 2004-2008. After leaving HP, he briefly served as Retail & Consumer Knowledge Domain Manager at PricewaterhouseCoopers, before joining Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited as Community Evangelist in Global Consulting Knowledge Management. He lives in Northville, Michigan.

How do you define knowledge management?

Knowledge Management (KM) is the art of transforming information and intellectual assets into enduring value for an organization’s clients and its people.  The purpose of knowledge management is to foster the reuse of intellectual capital, enable better decision making, and create the conditions for innovation. KM provides people, processes, and technology to help knowledge flow to the right people at the right time so they can act more efficiently and effectively.  To practice knowledge management, share what you have learned, created, and proved; innovate to be more creative, inventive, and imaginative; reuse what others have already learned, created, and proved; collaborate with others to take advantage of what they know; and learn by doing, from others, and from existing information.

Can you tell us a bit about your first job as a knowledge manager and how did you get this role (i.e., how did you make the transition to a knowledge manager, if it was not your first job)?

In 1996 I was asked by the senior vice president of systems integration at Digital Equipment Corporation to start a knowledge management program after we visited Ernst & Young's Center for Business Knowledge in Cleveland, Ohio.  When he heard that Ernst & Young had a Chief Knowledge Officer, he turned to me and said, "I want you to be our CKO."  I had been doing knowledge management for many years in addition to my official duties in professional services management, but we didn't call it that.  It has been referred to as something like "resource management" or "capability development" or "information."

My job was to launch the first KM program at DEC.  I had to define the strategy and approach we would use, and start the process of implementing changes incorporating people, process, and technology elements. Along the way, I had to endure many ups and downs, enlist allies in the cause to join my virtual team, get executive sponsorship from a succession of leaders, increase investment and commitment to the program, deal with constant organizational change, adjust to changing technology, migrate from and integrate with legacy software, exercise diplomacy with many other groups, and cope with two large-scale corporate mergers.

Thanks. What did you learn from this experience? What were three of the major challenges you faced? How did you overcome these challenges?

I learned:

  1. Put a strong KM leader in place, and ensure that the KM team has only strong members.
  2. Balance people, process, and technology components, with a project leader for each category.
  3. Establish a governance and collaboration process to engage all groups within the organization (e.g., business units, regions, functions), and to formally manage and communicate on all projects – appoint KM leaders in each major group.
  4. Hold annual worldwide face-to-face meetings to get all KM leaders informed, energized, and collaborating.
  5. Communicate regularly through newsletters, training, web sites, and local events.
  6. Get the senior executive to actively support the program.
  7. Engage with other KM programs, both internal and external, to learn, share ideas, and practice what you preach.
  8. Focus on delivering tangible business benefits that match the overall objectives of the organization.
  9. Deliver regular improvements to make the KM environment effective and easy to use.
  10. Set three basic goals for employees and stick to them for at least a year.

Three keys to the success of a KM program:

  1. Set three simple goals and stick with them for the long term.  Communicate them regularly.  Incorporate the goals and metrics into as many parts of the organization as possible (e.g., employee goals, incentive and rewards programs, and newsletters).
  2. Keep the people, process, and technology components of the KM program in balance.  Don't allow one element (e.g., technology) to dominate the other two.
  3. Lead by example.  Model the collaboration and knowledge sharing behaviors you want the organization to adopt in how you run the KM program.

Five pitfalls to avoid:

  1. Trying to take on too much.
  2. Focusing on technology.
  3. Not engaging the constituents.
  4. Doing too much studying and planning and not enough prototyping and piloting.
  5. Not reusing what others have already learned and implemented.

Can you say a bit more about the pitfalls, especially how did you manage not to take on too much. I have heard from a lot of KM leaders that the number one reason they fail is that they over promise and under deliver. What strategies do you recommend for budding managers?

Pick one focus area which addresses a widely-perceived need, where you can achieve positive results relatively quickly, and which can be implemented without the need for extensive approvals, expenditures, or custom development.  Direct most of your energy and resources behind this effort, and when it succeeds, pick the next focus area using the same criteria.

Find out if the senior executive has a hot button, pet project, or wish list.  Respond to these by implementing something for them, getting their endorsement and participation, and then widely communicating how everyone else in the organization can emulate the leader.

Pick the three goals and repeat them in all communications until everyone knows them.  Relentlessly stick to achieving these goals until you can declare success on one or more of them.  Then pick new ones and repeat the process.

Harness the efforts of others and connect their people, processes, and tools into your program.  For example, if another group has implemented a blog platform that your program can use, embrace that as your blog platform rather than launching your own.  If yet another group has an innovation process, adopt it as yours.  And invite people outside your group to participate in your activities as virtual or extended team members.

Thanks. Can you please also say a bit about the importance of prototyping and piloting approaches and solutions to KM?

Classic software development projects included lengthy time allocations for analysis, design, and development before users ever had a chance to try out the results.  Given that it is difficult to know exactly what features users want and how they should actually work before using a new program, the "finished product" would often be unsatisfactory to the users for which it was developed, despite the fact that it met their specifications.

Knowledge management programs and intranet systems often make the same mistakes as software development projects.  Lengthy designs or redesigns are followed by big launches and then by users disliking or ignoring the touted offerings.  I call this the "big bang" approach, such as when a new or revised web site is unveiled after six months of development, only to miss the mark as judged by its intended audience.  What are the users supposed to do during the time prior to launch?  It's much better to quickly launch a simple site serving up the most important content (as defined by the users) and then continue to improve the site and add more content on an ongoing basis.  This results in a site which is both immediately useful and which is also perceived as being continuously improved.

Whenever you have a potentially good idea for a people, process, or technology innovation, try it out as soon as possible.  Start by discussing it with a group of trusted colleagues, fellow members of a community of practice, or insightful friends and family.  Mock up a simple picture, screen shot, or process flow.  Encourage candid comments and suggestions, and incorporate as much of this feedback as possible in your initial design.

Implement your idea directly, through a colleague, or through a team good at development.  Do this sooner, rather than later.  Publicize your initial implementation through a relevant community of practice, your social network, and your work team.  Solicit feedback for improving functionality, usability, and effectiveness.  Then quickly make improvements and repeat the cycle.  Continue this process indefinitely, with longer cycle times as functionality better aligns with user requirements.

Over the years, can you describe what has changed in your approach to leading knowledge management programs in organizations?

My approach has evolved as opposed to changed.  I emphasize understanding the needs of the organization and responding to those needs, rather than trying to roll out a system and try to get it adopted.

Here are 13 insights I have drawn from my 14 years in KM:

  1. Collect content; connect people
  2. Try things out; improve and iterate
  3. Lead by example; model behaviors
  4. Set goals; recognize and reward
  5. Tell your stories; get others to tell theirs
  6. Use the right tool for the job; build good examples
  7. Enable innovation; support integration
  8. Include openly; span boundaries
  9. Prime the pump; ask and answer questions
  10. Network; pay it forward
  11. Let go of control; encourage and monitor
  12. Just say yes; be responsive
  13. Meet less; deliver more

To read more about the interview, stay tuned for the book…

To be interviewed or recommend renowned KM leaders and managers for interviews, please send me an email.