Knowledge Management: From Brain to Business (PDF 5.5 - Asian ...

equired in our kind of business. More often business gets done because they have proximity
to the culture which they are addressing.
Martha Seng: I would say that for us this has been an issue from the start and that is
why we thought about having a statement of common values that everyone can identify
with and work on together, calling those values our Code of Ethics. It helps us to
address the differences in culture, in language and even just between two individuals.
This is an extract:
Page 52
Because we are separated by many miles, by diversity of cultures, and languages, we
at Buckman have a clear understanding of the basic principles by which we will
operate our company. These are, firstly, (a) that the company is made up of
individuals, each of whom has different capabilities and potentials all of which are
necessary to the success of the company; and second, (b) that we acknowledge
individuality by treating each other with dignity and respect, striving to maintain
continuous and positive communication in all of us.
These are relevant. When we come from different cultures, we do things in different
ways. In a similar situation, I might do something and he may do something else. Our
Code of Ethics helps us to remember the universal values by which each of us should
operate. I think it is not just for a company but for the world, as well.
Question: How do you make people take responsibility after they receive
information and if information is distributed to all, but each one has different
information requirements, what is an effective way to deal with it?
Martha Seng: If someone has received information but does not want to use it or be
responsible for using it, and this person does it deliberately all the time despite receiving
good and relevant information, then this should probably be reflected in that person’s
performance appraisal. Over the years we have had one or two examples where we had
to let people go because they refused to cooperate or did not assume responsibility.
Question: For codification purposes, for converting from tacit to explicit knowledge,
which tools or procedures have you used that yield good explicit knowledge? Please
give an example of codification infrastructure.
T.S. Rangarajan: As I described earlier, storytelling or theater processes are specific
instances where knowledge is being captured. So let us say that there was a big fire in a
plant—how was that fire handled? Nobody has recorded that. Until such time that you have a
knowledge management system in place, people would simply quote that as an incident in
the logbook and file that complaint with the fire department. There might have been an email
sent. But that incident has not been recorded as an incident for future improvements.
So you stated the question to the group by saying, “Oh there was a fire in another plant.”
What would happen? People would come out. Everybody would tell his or her story. “You
know, I was in this plant when it happened.” Try to document the whole thing as a story.
Once you document you connect tangible artifacts supporting that document like there was a
police report filed this date. So you create that whole artifact surrounding those documents.
You can extend this to complex maintenance problems, or even to meetings that you had
this morning. In the meeting, records describe what decision was taken, how the decision
was arrived at, what are the things that helped that decision. In knowledge management, it
is clear that documentation is very important. There was an instance when one person
suggested that we set up a museum. He said, “If this company has been in existence for 40
years, then a museum can show how this company worked 40 years ago and moved on.” It
would be a very good place to bring clients to show credibility on what we did all those years
and how we have grown so much. There are things that are positive only if you have the