Buckman lab (knowledge sharing)


Published on

This ppt gives an insight into the buckman laboratories case study regarding knowledge sharing...

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Buckman lab (knowledge sharing)

  1. 1. Knowledge Management & Knowledge Sharing with reference to the “Buckman Laboratories Case Study” Arnab Chakraborty MBA(Oil&Gas)UPES2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 1
  2. 2. Agenda • Company History • Buckman Lab Case Discussion – Pre K’Netix era – K’Netix era – Challenges of K’Netix • Expected Questions In Mind • Knowledge Sharing @ Buckman Lab – Evolution of KM – Evolution of IT(The TimeLine) • Conclusion2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 2
  3. 3. Company History • Speciality chemical supplier • 1500 + associates • 10 manufacturing locations in 9 countries • 22 offices in 19 countries • Operates in 90+ countries • $485M + revenues • A video introduction to Buckman Lab2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 3
  4. 4. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – Difference between Stanley(pre 1978) and Bob Buckman(post 1978) philosophies • Stanley- Multinational Organization • Bob – Global organization (New Approach) • Stanley – Product driven • Bob – Customer driven (New Approach) – Key to the New Approaches • Expand sales force • Multicultural, multilingual and decentralized organization- code of ethics captured in a wallet sized laminated card2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 4
  5. 5. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – Best Practices • PhDs were send out to gather best business practices – Problem • Time consuming • Not enough PhDs • Information attenuation – Need for change(1986) • All GMs were connected to a database using IBM’s network for e-mail • But those who really needed info were those dealing with the customers2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 5
  6. 6. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – Need for change(1986) • Field sales persons were to have access • People who have knowledge can contribute now • Middle management revolted but Bob stuck to it • In 1987 first formal system to share and capture knowledge by using e-files to record cases • Solved by “existing Buckman knowledge” or new more effective and efficient solution to a new problem • Incentive received $100 ( few years later it was $200)2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 6
  7. 7. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – New Needs • In the 1980’s sales force increased 3.5 times • New sales companies were established in other countries • Targeted 25% sales from products < 5 years old • Operations set up in 20 countries, so need to speed up decision making. • Can’t go through the path of information source frontline- manager- manager- Guru and then revert back with Guru’s wisdom • Talk directly with those having latest and best knowledge2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 7
  8. 8. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – New Needs • New ways to access “unconscious knowledge in the organisation” ( Tacit Knowledge) • Connect individual knowledge bases together • In shortest possible time • A steady stream of information • Give everybody complete access to information • The organization starts moving forward on its own initiative2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 8
  9. 9. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Pre K’Netix era – Bob’s ideal KTS • No. of transmissions reduced to one • Access for everyone to the knowledge base • Everyone allowed to enter knowledge into the system • The knowledge base should be available 24/7 • User friendly • Updated automatically – Task force was formed to realise Bob’s idea2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 9
  10. 10. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • K’Netix era – KTD created in 1992 • Company’s network moved to CompuServe • Each associate was given a laptop + modem • User frielndly • Anywhere accessible – Different forums • TechForum – Open to all employees – 20 sections with message boards – Majority of the sections were devoted to Buckman specialities • Private Forums – For core customers • Customer information centre – SYSOPS • Track and answer requests • Two domain experts were appointed to give answers • Once discussion ends sysops determine to keep the case in the repository or not.2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 10
  11. 11. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • K’Netix era – The Launch • Informal conferences , discussion groups, hands- on training were provided to all associates • Tools were given but they had to think and apply • Few managers immediately took to the system • But few resented • Would people share their knowledge? • Initial hesitancies were there • Anything can be posted that did not violate the code of ethics of the company • Company as a ship and code of ethics as waterline2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 11
  12. 12. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • K’Netix era – The Launch • Freedom to communicate • Freedom to all associates and their family to access CompuServe and internet using the company funded ID • An unexpected benefit out of this was for some senior staff their more computer savy kids helped them get familiarized with the system • Associates worldwide spoke more than 15 languages. • 3 Translators were hired • Sysops were to decide which messages to translate and keep2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 12
  13. 13. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • K’Netix era – The 4th Wave • In 1994 a meeting was arranged in Scottsville to reward the 150 best knowledge contributors • As part of the discussion agenda in The 4th Wave ways to improve K’Netix was an integral part. Problems reported were – – Low level of participation by non-US associates – Language problem – Cultural issues • Immediately Bob created a Latino forum for the Spanish people and TWO more, one for Europe and one for Asia, Australia and Africa • By early 1997 1787 case histories in english and 685 in Spanish were recorded2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 13
  14. 14. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • K’Netix era – The early results • In 1994, 65% of Buckman’s associates were out selling as compare to 1979 • 33% sales were from products less than 5 years old as compared to 22% in pre K’Netix • 72% associates were college graduates as compared to 39% in 1979 – $8.4 m was KTD cost for 1994 and planned cost for 1995 was $9.7m2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 14
  15. 15. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Challenges of K’Netix – Revised strategies • In 1996 Buckman’s competition grew • A steering committee was formed to look into the existing strategies • “Customer Intimacy” • “3 key global markets”- paper, leather and water(approx 75% of current sales) • “the customer is the most important” • “Effectively engaged on the front line” • New goal : 80% of associates effectively engaged with customers by end of year – New focus • Find out ways for associates to expand their knowledge • Higher quality of individual will bring higher quality of problem solving and thus expand customer base • Focus on training, career building and even degree programs to retain and enhance professionals2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 15
  16. 16. Buckman Lab Case Discussion • Challenges of K’Netix – Recognitions for K’Netix • More than 30 companies visited BL to learn about K’Netix • BL received Arthur Anderson Enterprise Award for Knowledge Sharing and The Smithsonian Computer World award for Knowledge sharing in the Manufacturing sector – New challenges • CompuServe’s acquisition led to network cost rise of $90000 per month from $75000 per month • It made K’Netix bit more complex thus resulting in immediate 30 % drop in usage • “how to build trust in virtual world”2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 16
  17. 17. Expected Questions in Mind • What are the criterion for a company to keep in mind while adopting Knowledge Management? – Size of the company • Small companies- develop informal systems • Large companies( >500 emp)= best is formal systems – Location • In the sense whether offices and employees are scattered all over the globe or are concentrated at one place – Design a KS/KM tool that’s easy to use – Culture – Language – Rewards and recognitions – Training and learning centres2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 17
  18. 18. Expected Questions in Mind • What are the general/common pitfalls for organizations attempting to implement KS/KM systems? – Starting too big • many experts suggest starting with pilot projects in which you can measure results quickly – Believing the key is Technology rather than people, customer, culture – Top management fails to set the right example2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 18
  19. 19. Expected Questions in Mind • What are the key elements of K’Netix? – Code of ethics – Different forums for different requirements – Dedicated staff(sysops) – Leadership involvement – Transparency and openness – User friendly – Can be accessed any where2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 19
  20. 20. Expected Questions in Mind • Do you think the current system depicted in the case in effective? What are its limitations? And how do you think you can overcome this limitations? • How do you think you can address to the 3 challenges listed at the end of the case ?2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 20
  21. 21. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • EVOLUTION OF KM – What does BL provide to its Customers? • Unique Chemistry • Problem solving skills • Application knowledge • Knowledge of customer systems • Ability to establish relationships based on faith and trust2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 21
  22. 22. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • What is a knowledge product? BP1 BP2 BP 3 Products CORE KNOWLEDGE Solid product is at the core with layers of knowledge2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 22
  23. 23. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Culture of knowledge developed by leadership – Dr Stanley j Buckman- Gathering • Hire all educated, intelligent • Copy all docs to memphis • Idea trap – Robert H Buckman- Sharing • K’Netix • E-Learning – Steven B Buckman- Applying • Map learning and knowledge to business processes • Developing and formalizing processes for customer interactions and internal effectiveness2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 23
  24. 24. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • The “LEVERS” in Leveraging Knowledge – People:Cultural development • Organiozational knowledge base • Embracing a common set of values drives trust • Trust drives a wilingness to learn and to expand the knowledge base as a whole – Processes : Skills development • Best practice disciplines- account management • Teaming / community disciplines – Technology : increasing efficiency • Provide anytime anywhere access • Supporting communication, collaboration and coordination2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 24
  25. 25. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Leveraging Knowledge – Leveraging knowledge deals with both the cultivation and creative application of knowledge2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 25
  26. 26. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Application of knowledge through problem solving2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 26
  27. 27. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Creating and converting knowledge Collaborating Articulation Learning Integration2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 27
  28. 28. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Screenshot of BL KT tool2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 28
  29. 29. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Screenshot of BL KT tool2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 29
  30. 30. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Screenshot of BL KT tool2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 30
  31. 31. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Screenshot of BL KT tool2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 31
  32. 32. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Screenshot of BL KT tool2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 32
  33. 33. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Knowledge sharing in Action – Examples of systems for generating, capturing and sharing knowledge • Learning centre • TeamToolz • Buckman Portal Communities • Account management programs2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 33
  34. 34. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • Knowledge Management @ BL TimeLine2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 34
  35. 35. Knowledge Sharing @ BL • IT Management @ BL TimeLine2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 35
  36. 36. Conclusion • The purpose of any knowledge management effort is to make knowledge visible and accessible throughout the entire organization. To achieve that goal requires the creation of an infrastructure that includes people, technology , tools, and practice. Of course, the most of important of these elements is people. Infomediaries are unique individuals who understand how to capitalize on information technology, maintain a synergy between traditional and new information practices, and facilitate knowledge sharing. As Tom Davenport argues, “Successful knowledge transfer involves neither computers nor documents, but rather interactions between people.”2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 36
  37. 37. References 1. Harvard Business School, Buckman Laboratories (A) 2. Creating Collaborating Environment: The Human Element by Cheryl M Lamb 3. The Evolution of KM at Buckman Laboratories by M Sheldonn Elis and Mellisia Rumirez, Buckman Laboratories. 4. The Evolution of IT at Buckman by Tim Meek 5. The Knowledge by Mellisia Rumirez 6. Taking knowledge Sharing to the Next Level by Kathy Buckman Gibson2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 37
  38. 38. 2/7/2013 Buckman Laboratories International 38