Process Oriented Knowledge Management
•
2 likes•1,313 views
The document discusses process oriented knowledge management at Credit Suisse. It focuses on identifying knowledge intensive processes, integrating knowledge management into those processes, and delivering the needed knowledge to enable competitive advantage through better quality, reduced costs and faster implementation. Specific examples provided include lessons learned processes, practical examples of best practices, and process risk management. The overall goal is to execute knowledge processes that create, organize, distribute, apply and evolve knowledge within the organization.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (18)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (8)
Similar to Process Oriented Knowledge Management
Similar to Process Oriented Knowledge Management (20)
More from Michael Wyrsch
More from Michael Wyrsch (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Process Oriented Knowledge Management
- 1. 1 Process Oriented Knowledge Management Model and Methodology & Integration Michael Wyrsch Vice President, Head Global Knowledge Management OE, Credit Suisse © Wyrsch & Partner
- 2. Why Process Oriented Knowledge Management ? • Inside Credit Suisse our work is defined by processes • Main goal is to focus on knowledge intensive processes, contributing to create value (value chain oriented) • Knowledge Management is integrated in processes ( e.g. CMMI) • Processes provide part of the context, that is important for the interpretation and construction of process-relevant knowledge and knowledge flows • This means: We can deliver the needed knowledge which enables competitive advantage Benefit = better quality + reduced cost + faster implementation © Wyrsch & Partner 2
- 3. KM = Knowledge Mgmt Identify knowledge intensive processes Innovate and expand knowledge Share knowledge with others Make knowledge available, retrieve and use knowledge Update and enhance knowledge, delete obsolete knowledge Measure and control knowledge intensive process Knowledge ExecutionKnowledge Baseline Select Analyze Create Organize Distribute Apply Evolve Extract, cluster and save knowledge Extract, cluster and save knowledge Measure Process Oriented Knowledge Management: Foundation © Wyrsch & Partner 3 KM Management
- 4. Process Oriented KM: Execution Elements © Wyrsch & Partner 4 Knowledge Process Infrastructure Knowledge Basis Knowledge Intensive Processes MethodsMethods CreateCreate EvolveEvolve OrganizeOrganize DistributeDistribute ApplyApply Create Evolve Organize Distribute Apply Create Evolve Organize Distribute Apply
- 5. Process Oriented KM: Knowledge Process Execution © Wyrsch & Partner 5 Infrastructure Knowledge Basis Knowledge Intensive Process Knowledge Intensive Process MethodsMethods Knowledge Process Create Organize Apply Distribute Evolve
- 6. Process Oriented KM: Knowledge Project Approach © Wyrsch & Partner 6 Select Analyze Identify Design Implement Get process basic information Apply process evaluation Connect to Owner Process Flow Knowledge Flow People Knowledge Improvement Areas: Identify & Prioritize Design Knowledge Process: • Create • Organize •Distribute • Apply • Evolve Apply Methods Verify Design Update Knowledge Intensive Process Roll-out Knowledge Process SAIDI Knowledge Baseline Knowledge Process Creation Create Evolve Organize Distribute Apply
- 7. Knowledge Baseline (Method: Knowledge Mapping) © Wyrsch & Partner 7 Select Create High Level K-Map Run K-Map session (for each main area in overview) Analyze Identify main areas with high level processes map on a common axis with Subject Matter Experts (SME) divide area in steps for each step: verify and harmonize process identify k-pieces (explicit/tacit) Agree on action plan High Level K-Map with areas and resources Knowledge Need Scheduled High Level K-Map Session KM Experts Business Representatives KM Experts SME's users Scheduled K-Map Sessions Methodology Overview: Structure of knowledge High Level K- Map Detail Level K- Map SME's List of K-Pieces Action plan Benefits
- 8. Process Knowledge Mapping © Wyrsch & Partner 8 Activities: Activity 1 Activity 2 Activity 3 Activity 4 Business Process Knowledge Outputs (examples below) Knowledge Inputs (examples below) Explicit knowledge: Knowledge in documents = for example: article on a Web site Tacit knowledge: knowledge in person = for example A best practice from a expert Explicit knowledge: Report that results from performing the business process Tacit knowledge: knowledge in team = for example expert tips on performing an activity in the business process
- 9. Process Knowledge Mapping: Empty Framework © Wyrsch & Partner 9 Trigger Input Output Resources Activities Trigger Input Output Resources Activities Trigger Input Output Resources Activities Process Step 1 Process Step 2 Process Step 3
- 10. Knowledge Process Examples Out of the requirements from CMMI we implemented: • Lessons Learned (LL) • Practical Example (PE) – Good / Best Practice (G/BP) • Process Risk Management © Wyrsch & Partner 10
- 11. Example: Lessons Learned (LL) © Wyrsch & Partner 11 Infrastructure Knowledge Basis Project Management Process Project Management Process MethodsMethods Knowledge ProcessTrigger Create Organize Apply Distribute Evolve LL Capture Session Write LL Report and Evaluate Store Report Assign Attributes Read Reports Contact Peers Apply Learning Evaluate Reports Assign Tasks Distribute to "Owners"
- 12. Lessons Learned (LL) © Wyrsch & Partner 12 Capture LL with neutral moderators in structured sessions and deliver standardized reports (PMC-10*) Share LL for individual Reuse (PP-18*) Evaluate LL for continuous improvement recommendations * Reference to IT Solution Delivery Policies Region Switzerland Version 3.0 - Status: Approved by IT Switzerland MC on 21-Nov-06
- 13. Lessons Learned (LL) Establish contacts and networks for similar situations and projects. © Wyrsch & Partner 13 Processes well established LL repository/portal available Trained moderators Continuous improvements recommendation by dedicated quarterly reports Personal and professional development Team building and common understanding Additional insights to project from other roles Experience in open group reflection with a neutral moderator and improved quality of the Lessons Learned Report Bridging projects and situations with LL for reuse – improving project performance Current state
- 14. Lessons Learned: Current State (since Oct. 2006) • Numbers: – 350+ Lessons Learned Reports – > 7000 recommendations – ~ 3000 user hits monthly – calculated 6 person days saved by reuse (organizational + individual) – survey results 3 persons days saved by individual reuse • Locations: – Switzerland – Singapore (rollout planned to all locations) – Video Conferencing • Staffing: – 2 Lead Moderators (KSMF 5) – 13 Moderators: 4 Business, 9 IT (they stay for a year) © Wyrsch & Partner 14
- 15. Lessons Learned Customer Feedback © Wyrsch & Partner 15 Efficient, well prepared, least effort for the project team Simple efficient method that involves all participants. Good moderation of workshop We keep making the same mistakes. Deadlines too short, not enough resources. I hope this will help our line management see these problems in a structured way so that they have arguments for their line managers. I found the mix business/IT extremely useful. Our viewpoints at times were really very different even though we were addressing the same issues. the objective was clear the purpose was clear people spoke up moderator made people feel comfortable moderator was effective as in whenever the team was going on an 'offline' subject this was brought back to the main focus feelings were captured perfectly finger-pointing was avoided, instead facts and events were analyzed I personally learned on the go during this exercise, it's useful to hear the other side of the story.
- 16. Lessons Learned Evaluation © Wyrsch & Partner 16
- 17. Lessons Learned implementation issues © Wyrsch & Partner 17 Evaluate Reports Assign Tasks Distribute to "Owners" Does not work really good! Process-Owners have problem to convert lessons in process changes because of: • Other priorities • Other changes requests • Understanding the indivdual case • Etc. Personnel impact = high Organizational impact = low
- 18. Learning in Organisations © Wyrsch & Partner 18 Schön and Argyris (1978) – learning involves the detection & correction of error. Governing variable Action strategy Consequences Single loop learning Double loop learning
- 19. New and tested Approach © Wyrsch & Partner 19 Preparation LL Workshop Workshop Results Eval. Department LL Workshop Call to action Setup: • Focus on a single department, responsible for one product • Different groups deliver part of the system •Define scope •Group people •Plan workshops •Conduct individual LL workshops •External Moderator •Group results in meanigful areas Workshop with all people: •Present Results •Consolidate areas •Extract real causes •Define actions for the Department •Assign people to actions with deadlines •Action = Change of the environment
- 20. KM build-in the Methodology: SCRUM © Wyrsch & Partner 20 RETROSPECTIVE: • Went Well? • Went Poorly? • Improve ?
- 21. © Wyrsch & Partner 21 For development teams: Risk, Outcomes and Practices (ROP) Model
- 22. Infrastructure Knowledge Basis Project Management Process Project Management Process MethodsMethods Knowledge Process Example: Practical Example (PE) – Good / Best Practice (G/BP) © Wyrsch & Partner 22 DiscoverPractical Example Publish PE Assign Attributes Collect PE-G/BP Apply to Current Work Out of several PE: Create Good/Best Practice Publish G/BP Trigger Create Organize Apply Distribute Evolve Store PE Review PE
- 23. Practical Example Good/Best Practice (PE G/BP) © Wyrsch & Partner 23 Enable the proposal and identification of Practical Examples (PE) Coordinate the conversion of PE G/BP and maintain the quality of the content Provide a central storage of PE and G/BP
- 24. Practical Example Good/Best Practice (PE G/BP) © Wyrsch & Partner 24 High quality and up-to-date examples for projects Reduce the reinvention of wheel Valuable material as input for Good/Best Practices Central and guided process to collect and maintain our knowledge and experience Implementation of Best Practice Management for CMMI L2, L3, ... Definition in IT Glossary Process defined/reviewed Repository available Ongoing flow of examples ~ 200 examples online Strong support of the templates Online feedback possible Feedback shows about 2-4 person days saved by reuse (per document) Current state
- 25. Process Risk Management © Wyrsch & Partner 25 Infrastructure Knowledge Basis Project Management Process Project Management Process MethodsMethods Knowledge Process Trigger Create Organize Apply Distribute Evolve Submit Risk-Plan to KAR Evaluate Risk mitigations Store good risk mitigation Assign Attributes Read Risk mitigations Contact Peers Apply Learning Evaluate risk mitigations Derive process / environment improvements Distribute to "Owners" Continuous Update Risk-Plan
- 26. Process Risk Management: Current state • Started in January 2010 • ~ 40 Risk mitigations stored • Continuous flow depends on project close (= trigger for submission) • Reuse benefits not yet calculated © Wyrsch & Partner 26
- 27. And bring it all together on one system: © Wyrsch & Partner 27
- 28. © Wyrsch & Partner 28 If you give me an egg and I give you an egg , we each have one egg If you give me an idea and I give you an idea , we each have two ideas : West African proverb A last word:
- 29. © Wyrsch & Partner 29 Contact MichaelMichaelMichaelMichael WyrschWyrschWyrschWyrsch Wyrsch & PartnerWyrsch & PartnerWyrsch & PartnerWyrsch & Partner Geisswies 24Geisswies 24Geisswies 24Geisswies 24 8414 Buch a. I.8414 Buch a. I.8414 Buch a. I.8414 Buch a. I. http://www.wyrschhttp://www.wyrschhttp://www.wyrschhttp://www.wyrsch----partner.chpartner.chpartner.chpartner.ch michael@wyrschmichael@wyrschmichael@wyrschmichael@wyrsch----partner.chpartner.chpartner.chpartner.ch ✆✆✆✆ +41 79 207 78 86+41 79 207 78 86+41 79 207 78 86+41 79 207 78 86