Organizational Development for Knowledge Management at Water ...

and to create new knowledge through a mutual learning process. For example, mentoring—a
relationship between an experienced Utility and a younger professional—can facilitate the
sharing of shallow and deep knowledge.
Knowledge is one of those rare things you can give away and still have. In the past,
knowledge was used in organizations to control others and maintain power. Today, knowledge
hoarders have limited value to their organizations and often create cultural barriers to learning.
Wherever possible, it is best to develop and share as much knowledge as possible so that
others can act independently and develop their own internally and situation-driven behavior.
Through reciprocal sharing, innovation springs into being.
While a necessary first step, simply having access to knowledge does not constitute sharing.
For example, many organizations make information available through technology systems, but
fail to incorporate knowledge maps or guides for users so they can find what they need and put
it to use. Yet, as The World Bank forwards, knowledge sharing has become a strategic
necessity to survival. A growing number of organizations are recognizing the need for
collaboration across organizational boundaries (see cross-utility collaboration).
Ideally, knowledge sharing emerges as part of the culture. Some examples that facilitate
knowledge sharing are: the support and use of teams and communities as part of the everyday
work process, the example of openness and integrity set by senior leadership; and an awards
program that rewards knowledge sharing. See the APQC best practice report on Creating a
Knowledge-Sharing Culture.
Evaluating and Measuring
While there is a need to measure expenses, schedule, scope, and quality, there are also
subjective measures for things like your team’s relationship with stakeholders, knowledge
sharing, innovative ideas emerging, etc. Any measure is appropriate if it helps ensure the
project is on track with its strategic intent. When picking metrics, ensure that you are measuring
for the future. Since what gets measured is what gets attention, it is important to think forward
to the desired end state and identify performance measures that move beyond specific goals to
serving as part of the implementation change strategy. The knowledge centric organization
model designed by the Department of the Navy uses three types of metrics to assess different
levels of KM impact, namely outcome (enterprise or overall value), output (project or task), and
system (technology tool). See the Department of the Navy Metrics Guide for KM Initiatives and
additional assessment tools. In Project Study #24 progress toward KM is measured as part of
the Utility’s systems-based management approach.
The perspectives of the customer, department, organization, and individual are critical to the
project’s success and, as appropriate, need to be incorporated into its evolution. The
implication for KM metrics is that it is important to identify who is likely to use the performance
measurement information. Potential users include strategic decision makers, special project
decision makers, funding and approval stakeholders, government agencies involved in approval
or regulation, or customers. Measures should be in terms that are familiar to the stakeholder,
there may be several different metrics that need to be captured for an initiative. There is no one
“right” set of measures for KM, and most initiatives will require a combination of measurement
types and classes to reflect the overall mission and strategy of the Utility and effectively
communicate with key individuals.
©2011 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.