Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Stefanie Dannemann
help and share ideas/knowledge to solve <strong>the</strong>m. “Usability testing” comes from <strong>the</strong> IT pr<strong>of</strong>ession;
people are invited to test a (any) product and to collect feedback and suggestions. I have used both
techniques to keep up with changing business environment and stakeholder demands and to
encourage team building bonds within my team. In addition, “working groups/task forces” on specific
<strong>the</strong>mes/topics can help facilitate regular discussion. Provided <strong>the</strong>ir facilitation and terms <strong>of</strong> reference
are clear, this type <strong>of</strong> organized discussion can enable people and departments to make suggestions,
share <strong>the</strong>ir best practices or lessons learnt, and build community buy-in for <strong>the</strong> practice. O<strong>the</strong>r
techniques I find useful are “workshops”, “brown bag lunches”, “quizzes”, “questionnaires”, “surveys”,
“visitor presentations” and “newcomer presentations”. I personally like “brown bag lunches”,
“workshops” and “quizzes” most because <strong>the</strong>y all encourage ei<strong>the</strong>r a face-to-face relationships or at
least a more involved exchange with <strong>the</strong> customer/client. They aim at a specific topic or goal, consist
<strong>of</strong> exercises and presentations that get everyone relaxed and involved, and end with a follow-up that
helps to improve <strong>the</strong> next similar event.
“Brown bag lunches” or “Brown bag seminars” are sessions or lunches set in an informal workplace
environment. They are organized at lunch time, or as c<strong>of</strong>fee breaks. The sessions are kept informal
by participants eating <strong>the</strong>ir own lunch packs, or simple food is provided by <strong>the</strong> host. In <strong>the</strong> States,
home-made or take-away lunch is <strong>of</strong>ten packed in brown paper bags to bring to work, hence <strong>the</strong>
name. Brown bag seminars normally run an hour or two (Brown Bag Seminars, n.d.). They are
intended to break <strong>the</strong> habit <strong>of</strong> employees sitting at <strong>the</strong>ir desk, surfing <strong>the</strong> web, and eating <strong>the</strong>ir lunch
in solitary. The technique has already become part <strong>of</strong> Knowledge Management toolkits, described by
Dalton (2009) as “a structured social ga<strong>the</strong>ring during an organizational lunch time period which is
used specifically for <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> transferring knowledge, building trust, social learning, problem
solving, establishing networking or brain storming.” A series <strong>of</strong> sessions can be used to provide for an
open and interactive exchange <strong>of</strong> opinions and discussions. Such discussion is a learning process
which <strong>of</strong>fers an individual or a group <strong>the</strong> opportunity to identify skills amongst each o<strong>the</strong>r that are
relevant to <strong>the</strong> organization and <strong>the</strong>ir own jobs. Usually, it is a great opportunity to receive feedback
from colleagues who might o<strong>the</strong>rwise not be involved in discussions. Generally, <strong>the</strong>se sessions are a
wonderful opportunity to cultivate a sharing working environment and allow people to learn with and
from <strong>the</strong>ir colleagues. Though it takes some exciting discussions and several good presentations to
gain more audience, <strong>the</strong>se sessions can be a good promoter <strong>of</strong> knowledge sharing.
An efficient workshop must focus on <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> audience and must have clear objectives. It is a
mix <strong>of</strong> ice breaker, brainstorming techniques, and good presentation skills (for example, avoiding
endless power point slides presented with a monotonous voice). The ultimate aim <strong>of</strong> a workshop is to
support a learning process for <strong>the</strong> participating group, elicit reactions, and facilitate <strong>the</strong> group work
towards <strong>the</strong> workshop objectives. Facilitation <strong>of</strong> this exchange <strong>of</strong> ideas and experiences creates an
environment where <strong>the</strong> learning and knowledge sharing is successfully achieved. The relationships
which develop in a workshop can establish understanding and knowledge exchange and can have
long-term effects on participants’ pr<strong>of</strong>essional collaboration.
The third technique I like to use is quizzes. Most people remember quizzes from school as a means <strong>of</strong>
checking students’ knowledge, but few recognize this tool’s rich features and potential. Used
appropriately, it can introduce learning opportunities for all employees, in an amusing way. Sending
<strong>of</strong>f a weekly short quiz to all staff, asking relevant questions about working areas, new developments
or changes, can reach out to more people than a two-hour all-staff meeting where most people doze
<strong>of</strong>f after 15 min.
In summary, <strong>the</strong>se techniques can enable an organization to establish a fluent communication and
knowledge exchange on an in-person, face-to-face basis without any use <strong>of</strong> technology. They should
be <strong>the</strong> first tools when selecting dynamic tools to implement an internal knowledge sharing strategy,
aiming to become more effective and productive. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong>se techniques, cannot
counter <strong>the</strong> pervasive organizational culture on <strong>the</strong>ir own; promoting knowledge sharing practice will
be much less successful in workplaces that value competitiveness and self-promotion over
communication and problem-solving. Moreover, while successful knowledge sharing requires
participation <strong>of</strong> all staff, <strong>the</strong>se techniques won’t work ei<strong>the</strong>r if <strong>the</strong> top management does not believe in
<strong>the</strong>m or refuses to support <strong>the</strong> practice.
1105