Introduction:The major concern of this project is that Global Citizen (GC) wants to contribute to the European Capital of Culture 2017 event in Aarhus (ECOC 2017), but does not know how. This is a problem, because if GC does not know how to contribute, it may not know how to contribute to other sustainable projects either. This threatens the organisation’s premise of existence, because if it cannot deliver value to companies, organisations and others, who work with sustainability, it will risk losing partnerships, or be unable to develop new ones, which, according to GC’s mission statement, is essential for the organisation. Instead of offering one specific suggestion for how Global Citizen can contribute to ECOC 2017, this project provides GC with a solution that aims to improve GC’s understanding of its core competencies and how it can deliver value to those who strive for more sustainable operations. Furthermore, it is also suggested that GC engages in cooperation with Aarhus Sustainability Network to better utilise both organisations’ knowledge on sustainability, which can serve as a way for them give ECOC 2017 a sustainable touch and thereby develop sustainable solutions for people to benefit from.
This is what you can expect to gain insight to during this presentation.
Context: To make sense of the project, it is necessary to understand the context. The context is viewed in relation to both the European Capital of Culture 2017 (ECOC 2017) and to Global Citizen as an organisation. The outside influence is that Aarhus has been appointed European Capital of Culture in 2017 is the basis of the context. If e.g. Sønderborg or another European city was chosen, this project would not have seen day’s light, because GC would not have been closely related to the project, since it is an organisation in the Aarhus area. Furthermore, globalisation also functions as an outside influence, because it can be argued that globalisation has had a certain impact on the cultural environment in and around Aarhus. Then, the public’s increased awareness of the importance of sustainability also functions as an outside influence. Issues like global warming, animal welfare, and working conditions are argued to influence GC’s work on sustainability, because GC strives for “(…) a global society where economic, social, environmental and demographic issues are solved to the benefit of all”. Then, the ecological factors are considered to be governmental institutions’ desire to improve welfare for citizens, and the history behind ECOC, because these are viewed as ongoing. Governmental institutions are generally perceived as entities that seek to improve the welfare among citizens, which often is related to economic growth. ECOC’s history naturally determines the context of the event in 2017, and since this keeps developing and changing from year to year, it is viewed as an ecological factor in this context. With regards to attitudes and norms, Aarhus municipality wants to brand and improve the image of Aarhus, which most likely will improve its financial position due to increased levels of tourism and potential increase in the local employment rate (consequence). In this way, it will also be possible to actually confirm the ecological factor suggesting that governmental institutions’ desire to improve welfare. So, when Aarhus is branded and gets an improved image, Aarhus municipality will most likely gain more resources to improve the welfare for the citizens in and around Aarhus. Moreover, GC’s focus is to “(…) assist organisations, companies and others that work with sustainability (…)” with the sustainability information and knowledge their taxonomy offers. This is GC’s norm, which responds to the public’s increased awareness about sustainability. Then, the consequence of this is that Global Citizen sees an opportunity to support Aarhus municipality in carrying out ECOC 2017, and to incorporate sustainability as a part of its “Rethink” theme. http://ec.europa.eu/culture/our-programmes-and-actions/doc413_en.htmAarhus 2017’s financial effects http://www.aarhus2017.dk/projektet/maal-og-effekter
PSOK: According to Kampf (2013 p. 198) the PSOK analysis tool “analyses the stakeholders in terms of the aspect of the Problem that affects them, the part of the Solution addresses their problem, the Outcomes for that stakeholder group and the Knowledge content from the context”. This analysis also helps one to better determine the goal of the specific project, because it takes different stakeholders’ point of view into consideration. In this context, it clarifies the project conception for GC by offering insight to Aarhus municipality and Aarhus Sustainability Network’s stakes in ECOC 2017. Then in terms of knowledge management theories, GC’s expert knowledge on sustainability ought to be made explicit when presenting their way of contributing in the ECOC 2017 to Aarhus municipality. This is what Nonaka et al., (2000) explains as externalisation, because GC and Aarhus municipality are to engage in a dialogue in order to utilise GC’s expert knowledge for the benefit of Aarhus municipality and its stakeholders (e.g. citizens and businesses in Aarhus). Thus, a dialoguing bais developed. Moreover, such dialogue will also imply certain knowledge asymmetries, because GC is assumed to know more about sustainability than Aarhus municipality, but, on the other hand, Aarhus municipality is assumed to know more about the big picture of ECOC 2017. And in order to increase the chances for a mutual understanding, GC is suggested to communicate in an interspecialisticway, because GC and Aarhus municipality are considered experts within two different fields. Aarhus municipality’s problem is that it strives for CO2 neutrality in 2030, which implies that several initiatives for a sustainable future will be taken. Regarding knowledge theory, Aarhus municipality will have to adopt the explicit knowledge that is proposed by GC and make it tacit in order to be able to implement it in the ECOC 2017 (internalisation). This will then give Aarhus municipality an opportunity to externalise this knowledge and thereby influence its stakeholders (businesses and citizens) during ECOC 2017 with sustainable cultural events. Aarhus Sustainability Network (AASN) will be able to develop better knowledge about sustainability by engaging in cooperation with GC. This means that AASN and GC are to form a strategic community that may develop a synergy effect, if they are able to utilise the knowledge asymmetries that exists between the two. This is due to AASN and GC’s mutual interest in a sustainable future, which is argued to help them achieve a successful partnership even though there may be a certain level of diversity in terms of e.g. working routines and focus areas between the two. - Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues. In: Bucchi, M. & Lewenstein, B., V. Handbook of public communication of science and technology. Routledge. 57-76. London.Aarhus CO2-neutral in 2030 – Tackling Climate change in EcoCity Aarhus
Problem: In this project, Global Citizen’s problem is primarily viewed as an internal problem. Since GC has a hard time identifying how to best contribute to the event, which is concerned with Aarhus as European Capital of Culture in 2017, it may be hard for GC to engage in future cooperation with Aarhus municipality and other organisations. The difficulty to determine how to best contribute to ECOC 2017 gives the impression that GC is not fully aware of its core competency and its overall purpose as an organisation. This is also substantiated by GC’s communication on its website, which is perceived as being rather ambiguous, since it is necessary to e.g. say “Still, you might be thinking why we are here?” below the presentation of GC’s vision and mission. Also, it should not be necessary to ask the reader “So, what exactly are we doing?” This increases the level of ambiguity, because it should be perfectly clear in the vision- and mission statement, what Global Citizen does and why. The reader may doubt the credibility of the organisation, because such question can give the impression that even GCdoes not know what it does. This is also substantiated by the statement “(…) we do not just focus on one or a few or even all topics within sustainability. We focus on all the important topics within sustainability”. It gives the impression that Global Citizen does not know what to focus on. So, when one takes into consideration that Global Citizen does not know how to contribute to ECOC 2017, it may be due to internal uncertainty about the organisation’s competencies. Iterative process: At first, a specific suggestion to how Global Citizen can contribute to ECOC 2017 was sought to be identified, but in order for GC to engage in future cooperation with business partners, an internal perspective is needed.http://www.globalcitizen.net/about/
The problem definition is based on the provided exam case, p. 2. The background for the goal is based on GC’s problem and will be explained in further detail when going through the objectives of this project. Then the link(s) between the objectives and the goal, and how these in the end solve the problem will be clarified.
In order to reach the goal of finding the best possible way to contribute to ECOC 2017, GC first needs to identify its core competency(ies). This is based on the marketing idea that an organisation needs to find its unique selling proposition in order to compete in the market place. This will help reveal what GC does best, and thereby function as a way to improve GC’s communication towards other companies and organisations. This will most likely increase their willingness to engage in cooperation with GC. This is why the first objective is to “identify core competencies to better know how GC can deliver value”. Completing this objective will most likely, in the short run, help GC communicate more specifically in what way the organisation can contribute to ECOC 2017. Then in a long term perspective, this may lead to better collaboration with business partners and thereby ensure a more successful delivery of value to GC’s stakeholders. Kotler et. al., (2009, p. 82).
The second objective is then, “to engage in cooperation with Aarhus Sustainability Network to share and utilise knowledge”. Such cooperation can also help GC better determine how to bring value in the process of reaching a mutual goal, because the members of GC will naturally discover their role in the strategic community before it is possible for them to perform. In doing so, GC is to discover how to contribute to ECOC 2017, because AASN and GC’s mutual engagement in sustainability most likely will reveal GC’s core competency during knowledge sharing and knowledge creation. Hence, by working together towards a common goal, GC can better determine its role and thereby get to know how to contribute to ECOC 2017. Tuckman’s group development model in Buelens (2009).
The “How” and “Why” mapping helps explain the context behind the problem and makes it more tangible, because the problem is no longer just technical, but made social by asking why the objectives are chosen. Moreover, it also ensures that the objectives are linked to the solution, and provides one with an opportunity to stay on track during the project. Mikelonis,Betsinger & Kampf (2006)
WBSIn relation to identifying GC’s core competency(ies), it is necessary to make an internal analysis (activity 1.1). Here classic marketing theories like the value-chain-analysis, SWOT-analysis and PEST-analysis provides one with sufficient information to identify a core competency. The value-chain-analysis looks into support and primary activities that make up an organisation’s value delivery. Then the SWOT-analysis helps identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the organisation. Especially by clarifying the strengths and weaknesses of the organisation it will be possible to identify GC’s core competency(ies). In relation to both opportunities and threats, it is necessary to develop a PEST-analysis in order to understand GC’s external environment. The PEST-analysis looks into political, economic, socio-cultural, and technological trends in the external environment, which may take place on either a local, national or international level. In activity 1.2, it is suggested that GC managers’ perception of GC’s purpose and core competencies are taken into consideration. This may increase the level of transparency in the organisation and thereby make it easier for editors to communicate GC’s potential to e.g. Aarhus municipality, which may see how GC can contribute during ECOC 2017. Kotler et., al. (2009)
For the second objective (engaging in cooperation with AASN) it is necessary to develop a plan that explains GC’s expectations to the cooperation and a potential strategic community. In addition, it is necessary to clarify the potential benefits both organisations can achieve from cooperating. Then, when a meeting has been arranged, there is an opportunity to develop a joint enterprise, where both organisations are accountable for working towards their mutual goal of a more sustainable future. In developing a joint enterprise, it is necessary to develop a mutual understanding of the cooperation. This can be done by explaining the expectations and the purpose for cooperating, while linking it to the core competencies of both organisations.
The network diagram shows that the project only takes 15 work days, where the internal analysis of GC is the critical path (black boxes with bold text), because it is viewed as requiring the most resources. Engaging in cooperation with AASN is based on the assumption that AASN is willing to cooperate, since both organisations share a mutual interest, which is why this path is set to take only 9 work days. Then, it should be noted that this project only sets the scene for such cooperation, and does not take the maintenance of the strategic community into consideration. The short project time is also a cause of the opportunity to multitask during the project. The various internal analysis-tools can be used simultaneously, and the same goes for several of the tasks in establishing the cooperation with AASN. In addition, there is a slack of 6 days in setting up the cooperation with AASN, which means that this part of the project can afford a delay of up to 6 days before the whole project is delayed. However, it is suggested that the two objectives are fulfilled rather quickly, because the consequences of not knowing one’s core competency and how to contribute to ECOC 2017 may harm the GC’s premise of existence, as mentioned above. It is recognised that this is fairly short, but it is still an essential piece of work GC has to do, because it will help GC deliver value to business partners in the future, and to determine the best way for GC to contribute to ECOC 2017.Initially, the identification of GC’s core competencies was set prior to engaging in cooperation with AASN, but both initiatives are intended to be carried out more or less simultaneously, because they will support each other in their respective processes, and thereby provide room for GC to better find a way for them to contribute to ECOC 2017.
The Gantt chart shows that the project is able to start as soon as Tuesday June 4 2013, and it will finish on June 24 2013. Here, the slack of up to 6 days is visualised as the blue dashed line.
During this project, GC will be able to develop sufficient knowledge to decide how it can best contribute to ECOC 2017, because the internal analysis and the cooperation with AASN ensure that mere information is turned into knowledge, as it is put into specific contexts (Nonaka et al., 2000). GC’s tacit knowledge about the organisations’ identity (who/what it is) should be made explicit in order to better persuade Aarhus municipality and business partners to engage in collaboration with GC. Moreover, by completing the objectives of this project, GC will be able to develop stronger and more explicit knowledge communication to its stakeholders, since, the internal analysis helps lowering the ambiguity in the organisation’s communication about how it can deliver value. In the long run, this project is to form the basis for a closer partnership with Aarhus municipality, because it will be possible for GC to explicitly inform the municipality about how GC can contribute to ECOC 2017 and the goal of reaching CO2 neutrality in 2030. Thus, GC’s knowledge about sustainability can to a higher degree be utilised by Aarhus municipality during ECOC 2017, when GC knows its core competency and how to deliver value. In addition, the bargaining power of GC will most likely be strengthened by cooperating with AASN, because it will help identify GC’s role and thereby make the organisation aware of how to contribute towards a common goal. Finally, in completing the proposed objectives, GC will form a dialoguing bawith both Aarhus municipality and AASN, which will make GC able to; make its knowledge on sustainability explicit through interspecialistic knowledge communication in order to contribute to ECOC 2017, create further knowledge on sustainability and GC’s core competency(ies), and to better make decisions based on this knowledge. Kotler et al., (2009)
Global citizen project
RethinkFinding a way to contribute to ECOC 2017
Agenda• Project charter– Context analysis (open systems)– Problem, Solution, Outcome, Knowledge (PSOK): stakeholder analysis– Problem definition– Goal– Objectives• Cause mapping: How and why– Critical Success Factors• Work Breakdown Structure• Network Diagram– Critical path and slack• Gantt Chart• Knowledge Management Recommendations• References• Appendix
Context of ECOC 2017Outsideinfluences:-Aarhus isEuropean City ofCulture in 2017- Globalisation-Increasedawareness ofsustainabilityissues (globalwarming, animalwelfare etc.)Ecologicalfactors:-Governmentalinstitutionswants to im-prove welfarefor citizens.-The history ofECoCAttitudes andNorms:-Aarhusmunicipalitywants to brandand improve theimage of Aarhus- Citizens valuesustainability-Global Citizenfocuses onprovidingsustainbilityinformation/know-ledge-Businesses aremore sociallyresponsibleConsequences:-Aarhusmunicipalitycan improve itsfinancialposition-Sustainability isa way forcitizens to”brand”themselves interms of sign-value-Global Citizenhas anopportunity toinfluence ECoC2017 in asustainable way
Stakeholder:Problem: Solution: Outcome: Knowledge:Global Citizen (GC) Wants to knowhow to bestcontribute to ECoC2017Identify its corecompetencies inrelation to ECoC2017.Increased potentialfor cooperationwith Aarhusmunicipality, andimproved image forGC.Global Citizen’sneeds to know howto make theirexpert knowledgeexplicitAarhus municipality(AM)Strives for CO2neutrality in 2030.Wants to improveAarhus’ image viaECoC 2017Engage incooperation withGlobal Citizen andutilise GC’sknowledge onsustainabilityAM is able torethink culture in asustainable wayand therebyimprove Aarhus’imageNeeds knowledgeabout sustainabilityto reach the goal ofCO2-neutralityAarhusSustainabilityNetwork (AASN)Wants a sustainablefuture with betterliving standards forpeopleCooperate with GCin informing thepublic about theimportancesustainabilityKnowledge creationthrough knowledgesharing will helpdevelop moresustainablesolutions.Needs knowledgeabout sustainabilityand how this canbe utilised to give apositive impact onpeople’s livingstandards.
ProblemGlobal Citizen is uncertain about how tobest contribute to the ECOC 2017
GoalFind the best possible way forGC to contribute to ECoC 2017
Objective 1• Identify core competency(ies) to better knowhow GC can deliver value.• Short term perspective: it helps GC become morespecific in its communication• Long term perspective: sets the foundation forimproved collaboration with future business partners
Objective 2• Engage in cooperation with Aarhus Sustainability Network toshare and utilise knowledge.• Short term perspective: knowledge sharing gives insight to how GC candeliver its sustainbility knowledge to Aarhus municipality with regards toECoC 2017• Long term perspective: Colaboration sets the scene fordeveloping/expanding GC’s sustainability knowledge and therebysubstantiate the potential for future case work.
”How” and ”Why” mappingFind the bestpossible way tocontribute to ECoC2017By identifying GlobalCitizen’s corecompetenciesBy engaging incooperation withAarhus SustainabilityNetworkTo better know howGlobal Citizen candeliver valueTo share knowledgeand utilise it tocreate furthersustainabilityknowledgeWhyHow
Knowledge ManagementRecommendations• Knowledge as decision making– Turning information into knowledge. Tacit explicit (Nonaka et al., 2000).• Knowledge sharing knowledge creation(Wenger, 1998)– Strategic community with AASN• Reaching mutual superordinate goal (sustainability)• Dialoguing ba (Nonaka et al., 2000)
References• Buchhi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues. In: Bucchi, M. & Lewenstein, B., V.Handbook of public communication of science and technology. Routledge. 57-76. London.• Buelens, M. Sinding, K. & Waldstrøm, C. (2011). Organisational Behaviour (2nd custom ed.). NewYork: McGraw-Hill Custom Publishing• Kotler, P., Keller, K.L., Brady, M. Goodman, M. & Hansen, T. (2009). Marketing Management.European Edition. Pearson Education.• Kampf, C., E. (2013). Project management multiplicity: Current trends. Chapter 10. pp. 183-208.• Kampf, C., E. (2011). Chapter 1. Project management: A communicaitons approach. Unpublishedmanuscript.• Mikelonis, V. M., Betsinger, S. T., Kampf, C. 2006. Chapter 9. Using software tool to enhance yourproposal.• Storck, J., & Hill, P. 2000. Knowledge Diffusion through ”strategic communities”• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and idenitity, pp. 72-85.• Aarhus CO2-neutral in 2030 – Tackling Climate change in EcoCity Aarhus. Retrieved from:http://www.aarhus.dk/sitecore/content/Subsites/CityOfAarhus/Home/The-international-perspective/Large-development-projects/Aarhus-CO2neutral-in-2030.aspx?sc_lang=da• http://www.globalcitizen.net/about/• http://www.withaarhus.com/~/media/Subsites/Bybrand-landing-page/Spot-press/PDF/casebeskrivelse.pdf
Appendix• Work breakdown structure:1. Identify the core competency(ies) (CC) of Global Citizen1.1. Research the internal competencies of the organisation. Whichresources are available and can be utilized?1.1.1. Make value-chain analysis220.127.116.11. Identify support activities18.104.22.168. Identify primary activities1.1.2. Make SWOT-analysis22.214.171.124. Identify strengths and weaknesses or GC126.96.36.199. Identify opportunities and threats in the external environment188.8.131.52.1. Make PEST-analysis on local, national and global level1.2. Establish dialogue with managers about what they believe is the corecompetency of GC1.2.1. Formulate areas of concern184.108.40.206. Ask, “What is the purpose of GC?” What do we want to solve?220.127.116.11 Ask, “What do we want to achieve, and why?”1.2.2. Set up strategy meeting with the management18.104.22.168. Discuss Vision and Mission and why they make GC unique22.214.171.124. Gather the most vital/important managers at the same time and place
Appendix2. Engage in cooperation with Aarhus Sustainability Network2.1. Develop a plan that explains GC’s expectations for the cooperation2.1.1. Set expectations for the cooperation126.96.36.199. Ask for management’s expectations188.8.131.52. Link expectations to GC’s vision and mission2.1.2. Present expectations to Aarhus Sustainability Network2.2. Make contact to Aarhus Sustainability Network2.2.1. Develop communication plan184.108.40.206. Determine important issues to be addressed220.127.116.11. Clarify mutual benefits of cooperation2.2.2. Arrange meeting2.3. Develop joint enterprise2.3.1. Determine accountability2.3.2. Develop mutual understanding of the cooperation18.104.22.168. Explain expectations22.214.171.124. Hear AASN’s expectations126.96.36.199. Link to GC’s purpose and CC