An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

Queensland University of Technology

Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering

BEN910 – INTEGRATED PROJECT

An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industry (Automobile

Components Manufactures)

FINAL REPORT Lecturer : Wim Dekkers Supervisor

: Bambamg Trigunarsyah

Student Name

: Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar

Student No. : N6211216

Course : BN89, Master in Project Management

Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar -N6211216 BEN910 – Integrated Project

2

Statement of Authorship

The work contained in this project report has not been previously submitted for a

degree or diploma at any other tertiary educational institution. To the best of my

knowledge and belief, the project report contains no material previously

published or written by another person except where due reference is made.

Signed:

Date : 11-06-2010


3

Abstract

Knowledge is one of the critical factors in the total efficiency of the production in

any industry. This makes Knowledge Management (KM) in an organisation to be

a vital component of the organisation. But KM in the organisation is not

established as it should be. The research will identify the root causes of this issue

and to provide recommendations to the organisations to improve the KM in their

organisation.

The study of the literature showed that the KM has been influenced by various

factors which are still to be addressed. Some of the factors are organisational

elements (organisational structure, top management and individual employee),

issues in knowledge sharing (culture, motivation, attitude and assumptions) and

issues in knowledge creation (ignorance by top management and assumption

that it is research and development work).

The study of the current scenario of KM in Automobile Components

Manufacturers (ACM) with the help of survey with the management people who

are responsible for KM in ACM’s of their companies showed that the

manufacturers know that the KM is vital and they have already implemented in

their organisation in some form. But they have not given enough attention to KM

and it is still in unproductive stage. The ignorance by the top management is the

vital setback for KM. The ignorance is due to their ignorance of the root causes

and how to handle it.

The study will help the manufacturers to identify the problems which are

potentially influencing their KM implementation. The recommendations given in

the research like motivating employees to share knowledge, creating knowledge

base, implementing KM as a part of the job, etc., will help the manufacturers in

implementing the KM in an efficient and appropriate way.


4

Acknowledgements

This research project would never have been a success without the help and

support of a few people. I take this opportunity to extend my sincere gratitude to

them.

First and Foremost, let me thank my supervisor Prof. Bambang Trigunarsyah. He

owes a great deal of appreciation for being supportive, approachable and

realistic. He provided me information about project research resources and

research methodology and the he further guided me through each steps most

effectively.

I then thank all my colleagues, seniors and industrial experts who participated in

the survey conducted as part of the research. Their valuable comments and

suggestions proved very helpful. Furthermore, I thank all the researchers and

organisations, across the globe, whose work provided me extensive knowledge

on the project topic.


5

Table of Contents

Statement of Authorship ....................................................................................... 2

Abstract ................................................................................................................. 3

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................... 4

Table of Contents .................................................................................................. 5

1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 7

1.1 Problem statement ................................................................................... 7

1.2 Aims and objectives ................................................................................. 7

1.3 Approach ................................................................................................. 8

2 Literature Review ........................................................................................... 9

2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 9

2.2 Definitions and concepts .......................................................................... 9

2.3 Knowledge- related project work environments ..................................... 12

2.4 Elaboration of Problem Statement ......................................................... 16

2.5 Summary of literature review ................................................................. 33

3 Research Methodology ................................................................................ 34

3.1 Research approach ............................................................................... 34

3.2 Research instrument .............................................................................. 34

3.3 Contact method ..................................................................................... 34

3.4 Data analysis ......................................................................................... 34

4 Limitations of Research project .................................................................... 42

5 Results and Discussions .............................................................................. 42

6 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 43

7 Recommendations for ACM organisations................................................... 44

List of References ............................................................................................... 45

Cover Letter of Survey ........................................................................................ 51

QUESTIONNAIRE .............................................................................................. 53

Survey Results .................................................................................................... 56

Project Journal .................................................................................................... 59

Contact Records ................................................................................................. 63

Appendix A - Detailed background of ACM Project ............................................. 64


6

Appendix B – ACM Organisation Structure ......................................................... 66

Appendix C – ACM Process flow chart ............................................................... 67

Appendix D – ACM Project team structure ......................................................... 68

Table of Figures

Figure 2.1: Four knowledge-related project work environments ......................... 13

Figure 2.2: Knowledge-related project work environments ................................. 13

Figure 2.3: Transformation of individual team member’s knowledge into project

knowledge .................................................................................................... 19

Figure 2.4: Competence transformation of an engineer in the project/working life

..................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 2.5: Knowledge application in ACM Projects ........................................... 21

Figure 2.6: ACM Project culture .......................................................................... 29

Figure 2.7: Knowledge creation process ............................................................. 31

Figure 3.1: Survey result of Ques: 1 ................................................................... 35





Figure 3.6: Survey result of Ques: 12 ................................................................. 40

Figure 3.7: Survey result of Ques: 15 ................................................................. 41


7

1. Introduction

This research work studies the critical factors involved in developing a

Knowledge Management system in Automobile Components manufacturing

industries. The research will identify the critical factors which potentially influence

Knowledge Management (KM) in an organisation. A study will be conducted to

understand the past and current scenarios of the factors influencing KM in an

oraganisation. Based on the results of the study, the conclusions will be derived

and recommendations will be given to the industry for better practices which will

help in implementation of KM.

1.1 Problem statement

In my professional experience with Automobile Components Manufacturers

(ACM) projects I monitored that due to the lack of appropriate knowledge in the

project, there is some reduced efficiency in work. I identified the issue as making

similar mistakes and getting delays due to lack of knowledge sharing. Knowledge

sharing and knowledge management are critical in the project based industry but

there is no proper management in KM in the ACM projects (industry). This drives

me to investigate the root causes of this issue and provide solutions.

1.2 Aims and objectives

This research project aim is to develop and understand the knowledge

management functioning in project based manufacturing industry (ACM).

Key objectives that are aimed to be achieved in this research project are:

� To develop an understanding of knowledge acquisition, knowledge

creation, knowledge sharing and knowledge management system in ACM

� To identify the benefits from Knowledge Management system in ACM

� To identify the key factors which potentially influence knowledge

management system in an organisation and their effects on KM


8

� To make out the reasons for implementing/not implementing Knowledge

Management system in ACM

� To review the current status of Knowledge Management system that is

implemented in ACM

The results of the analysis will be used to provide practical advice to ACM

organisations in the form of guidelines. The outcome of this research project will

help to develop a knowledge sharing mechanism in project based manufacturing

organisations.

1.3 Approach

The study of the literature is used to develop the understandings of the KM, its

benefits in ACM and identifying the key factors of KM. The literature review of this

research project is from sources such as- high rated journals, books, websites

and online publications. With the help of the results from literature review, a

questionnaire for survey has been developed to understand the effects of the key

factors of KM, reasons for implementing or not implementing knowledge

management and current status of implemented KM in ACM. The questionnaire

for this survey is developed to pursue responses to questions in a direction that

would generate the most beneficial information on the knowledge management

system issues. It will be aimed at the experienced professionals who are

responsible for its successful management of ACM projects. After analysing the

survey data, the critical factors that affecting knowledge management system

development and functioning will be identified.


9

2 Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

The review of literature is performed to identify the critical factors which can

potentially influence KM in an organisation. The critical factors will be identified

by studying the benefits and phases of KM in an organisation. The phases of KM

includes knowledge creation, knowledge sharing and knowledge deployment.

The study will be on the general factors that influence KM in an organisation and

individual focus will be on KM in Automobile Components Manufacturers (ACM).

2.2 Definitions and concepts

2.2.1 Knowledge and Knowledge Management

Knowledge is a whole set of intuition, reasoning, insights, experiences related to

technology, products, processes, customers, markets, competition and so on that

enable effective action. Knowledge Management (KM) as a systematic,

organized, explicit and deliberate ongoing process of creating, disseminating,

applying, renewing and updating the knowledge for achieving organisational

objectives (Pillania, 2004, 2005).

Knowledge can be defined as “understanding gained through experience or

study.” In order to perform specialized task a person should be acquainted with

the ‘know-how’ of the things. Knowledge is an element which is present at an

individual and group level in the organisation. Knowledge is a cognitive, even a

physiological event, that takes place inside human mind (Nonaka and Takeuchi,

1995a).

2.2.2 Types of knowledge

Knowledge can be categorized as Tacit or Explicit (Nonaka and Takeuchi,

1995b). Explicit knowledge can be documented, categorized, transmitted, and

demonstrated. It can be accessed by other people even if the knowledge source

is absent explicit knowledge to know-that (Kogut and Zander, 1992; Hansen,


10

1999, Debowski, 2006) (example: material properties, technical information, tool

characteristics).

Tacit knowledge draws on the accumulated experience and learning of an

individual. It is hard to reproduce or share with others; tacit knowledge has been

linked to know-how (Kogut and Zander, 1992, Debowski, 2006) (example: problem

finding & solving in ACM projects, assembly procedure, tool settings, estimation of

process, machining and assembly timings).

According to Awad and Ghaziri (2004), tacit knowledge is knowledge embedded

in the human mind through experiences and jobs. In contrast, explicit knowledge

is knowledge codified and digitized in books, documents, reports, spreadsheets,

memos, training courses, e-mail, and the like. Thus, it is more difficult to retrieve

and transmit tacit knowledge as compared to explicit knowledge.

According to Debowski, there are 2 more kind of Knowledge: Codified and

Embodied. Codified knowledge : recorded and accessed through organisational

systems (Debowski, 2006) (example: ACM department procedures, machine and

assembly checklists). Embodied knowledge : held by individuals (Debowski, 2006)

(example: knowledge gained from projects and work experience, which held by engineers

and technicians).

2.2.3 Knowledge in project

KM in projects and project-based companies is also becoming a prerequisite to

sustain a competitive advantage (Love 2005). It is argued that without managing

knowledge in projects, knowledge assets can be lost when a project is

completed. This results in organisational knowledge fragmentation and loss of

organisational learning (Kotnour, 2000). However, in project-based companies

and projects in general, activities such as knowledge acquisition and sharing,

which are a part of Knowledge Management, are often very complex tasks. This

is due to the fact that project teams are often a set of diversely skilled people


11

working together over a limited period of time, and they often include members

who have never worked together before and who do not expect to work together

again (Dawes,1994).

According to Hall and Andriani (1999, 2002) knowledge which is new to a project

has to be either invented internally in the project or acquired from external

sources. This new knowledge may add to or substitute the project’s existing

knowledge base. Hall and Andriani categorise this new knowledge as either

additive or substitutive knowledge (Nooteboom, 1996). Referring to the project

type categorisation, it is possible to conclude that delivery and investment

projects use, by their nature, more additive than substitutive knowledge, and

Research & Development and design projects use, also by their very nature,

more substitutive than additive knowledge.

The project-based company is an organisation in which the majority of products

are made against custom-made designs for customers – the company’s mode of

production is dominated by projects. Production in project-based companies

takes place through project teams (Turner and Keegan, 1999). ACM (Auto

Components Manufactures) industries can be identified as project-based

company (Appendix A). Project-based organisations (Appendix C&D) are

temporary arrangement, emphasis on goals, dynamic, flexible, non-hierarchic,

decentralised decision-making and adhocratic (Anell and Wilson, 2002)

The project team is a group of people working together for a common goal- i.e

for project delivery. Knowledge sharing, problem solving and decision making are

some of the main activities of a project team. Project teams typically enjoy a

considerable amount of autonomy within the limits set (Lundin and Soderholm,

1995). Briner (1990) divide the project team membership into visible team

members that are part of the organisation but not permanently in the project, and

invisible team members that are stakeholders in the project while non-members

of the organisation. In ACM project visible team members are factory manager and


12

department heads, they are part project team, regularly involve, but not dedicated

completely to project (Appendix B). The invisible team members are sub-

contractors and suppliers under outsourcing & sub-contract department, but these

members are not part of organisation (Appendix A).

Project team building is the process of taking a collection of individuals with

different needs, background and expertise, and transforming them into an

integrated and effective work unit. Projects comprise individuals with different

competences, and different experience from other projects (Ruuska, 1999,

Tissen, 2000). In ACM projects Factory Manager performs project team building

process; he collects project team members and project engineer based on

project complexity and competence and experience of engineers and

technicians. The project engineer is selected based on project area of expertise

or major area of project activities (different departments) (Appendix B).

2.3 Knowledge- related project work environments

According to Koskinen (2004), with the help of identification of ‘knowledge gap’

between the existing knowledge base that is acquired by the project team, it is

possible to identify different knowledge-related project work environments. The

discussion in the following describes four different knowledge-related project

work environments that illustrate circumstances and situations where Knowledge

Management processes can take place in a project work context (Figure2.1 and

2.2)

Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar -N6211216

Figure 2.1 : Four knowledge(Source: Koskinen, 2004)

Figure 2.2: Knowledge- related projec(Source: Stahle and Gronroos, 1999)

N6211216 BEN910

: Four knowledge -related project work environments

related projec t work environments (Source: Stahle and Gronroos, 1999)

BEN910 – Integrated Project

13


14

2.3.1 Mechanical project work environment (similar projects in ACM)

In a mechanical project work environment (Figure2.1 and 2.2) a team tries to

reach predetermined single-minded interpretations – i.e the utilisation of explicit

knowledge is abundant. Moreover, in a mechanical project work environment the

knowledge utilised is often an additive in its nature. Success in a mechanical

project work environment requires that the team members are skilled in adapting

instructions. The tasks are precisely defined and a large proportion of the

relevant knowledge is transferred in a written form – i.e utilisation of information

technology in knowledge transfer is usually abundant. In a mechanical project

work environment, knowledge moves from the project management to individual

team members. Strictly speaking, knowledge is sent not for discussion but only to

be obeyed. Because the knowledge in a mechanical project work environment is

in a great part in explicit form, it can be sent to the people involved over vast

distances. The mechanical project work environment fits in projects in which

quality criteria must be met precisely (Koskinen, 2004).

In ACM Similar or less complex projects the handling of knowledge is seen as the

processing of knowledge primarily in a written form, and every problematic

situation is met by more processing of knowledge. In these types of projects the

possibility of multiple interpretations is not usually taken into account. This means

that a new standardised project processing is a manifestation of explicit and

additive knowledge. The implementation of a standardised project processing

takes place in this environment, which is described here as a mechanical project

work environment (Appendix A).

2.3.2 Organic project work environment (new project s in ACM)

In an organic project work environment (Figure2.1 and 2.2) the ambiguity of

knowledge is significant. The tasks involve inconsistent situations, and the

changes that they produce and the challenges produced by circumstances do not

necessarily have immediate answers. In the organic project work environment

solutions to problems are directed by non-linear thinking (R&D projects).


15

Engineers act based on their extensive research, intuition and experience. The

elements of knowledge consist of the multidimensional knowledge stores of the

project participants, which means that knowledge is often created with the help of

face-to-face interactions (Project team meeting and monthly department heads

meeting).

Knowledge in an organic project work environment is frequently more difficult and

multidimensional than in a mechanical project work environment. A lot of the

knowledge and know-how of a project team is based on experience-based tacit

knowledge. Moreover, in an organic project work environment the knowledge that

is created is substitutive in its nature (Koskinen, 2004).

In ACM New and complex projects in a concept of manufacturing a new

prototype tool, the concept is in great part a manifestation of tacit and substitutive

knowledge. The concept creation may begin with team members discussing a

variety of personal experiences, but as it proceeds the expressions should

converge through the understanding of individuals into one concept that becomes

their common focus. The team members may apply creative techniques that

make their insights and experiences more explicit, helping to bundle them into

key words that finally form a concept. Crystallisation of the concept is achieved

when all the team members feel that the concept corresponds with that they

know tacitly. The implementation of a product development project takes place in

the environment which is described here as an organic project work environment.

In ACM projects the R&D engineers actively involve with department heads and

project teams for manufacturing a new prototype tool (Appendix A).

2.3.3 Semi-mechanical and semi-organic project work environment

Semi-mechanical and semi-organic project work environments (Figure 2.1 and

2.2) are probably the most prevalent. Knowledge is created with the help of face-

to face communication and information technology. However, the utilisation of

information technology in knowledge creation and utilisation is more abundant in

the semi-mechanical project work environment than in semi- organic project work


16

environment, and face-to-face interaction-based knowledge creation and

utilisation is more abundant in the semi- organic project work environment than in

the semi-mechanical project work environment.

In ACM projects semi-mechanic and semi-organic project work environment will

be selected based on project complexity and process and technology involved in

project.

2.4 Elaboration of Problem Statement

There are a lot of factors which are related to KM in the ACM organisation. The

factors can be broadly classified as

• Factors which drive the ACM organisation to implement KM.

• ACM Organisational elements as factors.

• Factors affecting the knowledge sharing in an organisation/a project work.

• Knowledge creation and its issues.

2.4.1 Factors which drive the ACM organisation to i mplement KM

The following are the critical factors which are driving the managements to

implement KM in their organisations. KM gives the following advantages to the

organisations

• Enhanced decision making skills (Problem finding, prediction and anticipation).

• Improved problem solving ability and avoiding repeating mistakes.

• Increase in employee competence.

According to Leonard-Barton and Sensiper (1998), there are three main ways in

which tacit knowledge can be potentially exercised to the benefit of the

organisation.

Problem solving: The most common application of tacit knowledge is for

problem solving. The reason experts (project engineers) on a given subject can


17

solve a problem more readily than novices is that the experts have in mind a

pattern borne of experience (learning from pervious projects), which they can

overlay on a particular problem and use to quickly detect a solution. The expert

(project engineers) recognises not only the situation in which he finds himself, but

also what action might be appropriate for dealing with the situation. The project

engineers are responsible for problem solving in ACM projects.

Problem finding: A second application of tacit knowledge is to the framing of

problems. Some researchers distinguish between problem solving and problem

finding. Problem solving is linked to a relatively clearly formulated problem within

an accepted paradigm. Problem finding, on the other hand, tends to confront the

person the person with a general sense of intellectual unease, leading to a

search for better ways of defining or framing the problem. Creative problem

framing allows the rejection of the obvious or usual answers to a problem in

favour of asking a wholly different question. In ACM projects project team and

project engineer having a meeting to find potential project problems at design

stage.

Predication and anticipation: The deep study of a project seems to provide an

understanding, only partially conscious, of how something works, allowing an

individual to anticipate and predict occurrences that are subsequently explored

very consciously. Historical events for pervious projects and project problems

highlight these kinds of anticipation and reliance on inexplicable mental process

can be very important in invention. Risk assessment, estimation and planning

functions can be related to this process.

Employee competence: Balasubramanian (1999) define KM as an

‘organisational capability that allows people in organisations, working as

individuals or in teams, projects or other such communities of interest, to create,

capture, share and leverage their collective knowledge to improve

competitiveness and performance’. Increasing the employee’s competence has a


18

direct outcome on the financial results of the company. Hansen (1999) has

identified two broad approaches to the management of knowledge in

organisations, viz., the personalisation approach and the codification approach.

The personalisation approach would include face-to-face communication,

communication through structures such as networks of people, cross-functional

teams, committees, task forces, training and development, internal knowledge

sharing through benchmarking and job rotation, and creating of strategic

alliances. The codification approach refers to the technological route for KM and

would include the setting up of databases, data warehouses, decision support

systems, Enterprise Resource Planning systems, and electronic networks for

communication and sharing knowledge (Lakshman and Parente, 2008).

2.4.2 Organisational elements as factors

Some of the elements of the Organisation/Project like Top management,

individual project team member and the organisation knowledge will act as

factors which potentially influence KM in an organisation. The influence of these

factors are discussed below;

Individual project team member

The focus here is about obtaining knowledge from individual competence, skills

and knowledge for successful project completion. ‘Project team member’

primarily means a knowledge worker, whose skills and expertise are the

foundations of successful project implementation (Drucker, 1993). Thus, in the

case of an individual project team member ‘knowledge is the individual ability to

draw distinctions within a collective domain of action, based on an appreciation of

context or theory, or both (Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001). This means that an

individual team member’s capacity to exercise judgement is based on an

appreciation of context in the ethno-methodological, that a social being is

knowledgeable in accomplishing a routine and taken-for-granted task within a

particular context as a result of having been through processes of socialisation.


Within a well-functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual

team member is transf

central function of the project: knowledge moves efficiently within the project,

allowing everyone to know about other

common basis for discussions between different

project team the knowledge of individuals transfor

uncodified routines, and written explicit knowledge (

according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely

project and is refined through common interpretation. This common interpretation

can be developed by improving conversational and interpersonal skills as well as

taking into consideration various interpretations and perspectives within a project.

An individual’s personal competence in a project implementation and/ or in a

project-based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job

related knowledge and skills (which can be technical, professional, or

managerial) and also the mot

knowledge to others (Spencer and Spencer, 1993:73). Acquisition and sharing of

competencies depend on motivation as much as on technical knowledge

involved. According to Spencer

individual’s competence are crucial in transforming knowledge and skills into

effective project results.

Figure 2.3 : Transformation of individual team member’s knowle dge into project knowledge(Source: Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001)

N6211216 BEN910

functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual

team member is transformed into knowledge of the project. This is the most


allowing everyone to know about other’s problems and ideas. In this way, a

common basis for discussions between different individuals is created. Among a

project team the knowledge of individuals transform into shared understanding,

odified routines, and written explicit knowledge (Figure 2.

according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely





based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job


managerial) and also the motivation to expand use and distribute work



involved. According to Spencer and Spencer (1993), these two aspects of an


effective project results.

: Transformation of individual team member’s knowle dge into project knowledge

as and Vladimirou, 2001)


19

functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual

ormed into knowledge of the project. This is the most


problems and ideas. In this way, a

individuals is created. Among a

m into shared understanding,

Figure 2.3). Furthermore,

according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely within a





based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job-


ivation to expand use and distribute work- related



wo aspects of an


: Transformation of individual team member’s knowle dge into project knowledge


It is also important to understand that the performance of individuals varies over

time. This means that person’s competencies evolve in the course of their lives

as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shapi

performances, too. The

competence of an engineer has changed in the course of his working life. The

explicit technological knowledge that an engineer has gained in his or her formal

education has transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work

how, relationships between people, business skills, etc.

Figure 2.4 : Competence transformation of an engineer in the p roject/working life (Source: Koskinen and Pihlanto, 2006)

The competencies of senior

based and include a lot of tacit knowledge. This is because senior personnel

have had many chances to work in different contexts and situations, and they

therefore also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit

knowledge. This means, as said above, that the explicit knowledge which a

project engineer has gained being as a junior in a university has transformed in

the corse of his lifetime into

The traditional way to categorise knowledge is make a distinction between data,

information and knowledge. However, here we understood these terms by

N6211216 BEN910



as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shapi

performances, too. The Figure 2.4 below illustrates, in principle, how the



transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work

how, relationships between people, business skills, etc.

: Competence transformation of an engineer in the p roject/working life

nd Pihlanto, 2006)

The competencies of senior –level project team members are often socially



e also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit



the corse of his lifetime into diverse tacit skills.




20



as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shaping their

illustrates, in principle, how the



transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work-related know-

: Competence transformation of an engineer in the p roject/working life

level project team members are often socially



e also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit






stressing the human dimension

an interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement

Furthermore, we put the emphasis on a categorisation according to which

knowledge is divided into tacit and explicit knowledge. In many cases within the

project work tacit knowl

typically transferred between team members through face

Organisational knowledge

Organisational knowledge is the set of collective understanding embedded in an

organisation – in a project team and project

put its resources to particular uses (Bohn, 1994)

Figure 2.5: K nowledge application in ACM Projects (Source: Bohn, 1994)

All the knowledge needed in

Figure 2.5. The end of

lines are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project.

and department also have main activities and sub

N6211216 BEN910

stressing the human dimension – i.e that data are raw knowledge, information is

interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement



project work tacit knowledge is seen as the most important knowledge that is

typically transferred between team members through face-to-face interaction.

Organisational knowledge


roject team and project-based company – which enables it to

ts resources to particular uses (Bohn, 1994)

nowledge application in ACM Projects

All the knowledge needed in an ACM project implementation is visualised by the

end of darker centre line describes the project output. The

are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project.

and department also have main activities and sub-activities


21

i.e that data are raw knowledge, information is

interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement of an individual.



edge is seen as the most important knowledge that is

face interaction.


which enables it to

ect implementation is visualised by the

describes the project output. The light

are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project. Each process

tivities (Main activity-


22

Component testing; Sub-activity for Component testing -first sample, plot run, customer

sample approval) and also the project main activities (Design approval from

customer, Cost estimation) and its sub-activities (sub-contract works, supplier works,

standard part purchases) collection of all project and process main and sub-

activities determines the outcome of the project. Black (darker) line represents

tacit knowledge; Blue (lighter) represents explicit knowledge. The length of each

branch represents the activity’s relative extent to the project. With the help of this

Figure 2.5 it is possible to realise that a project may need many types of

knowledge and that the Knowledge Management methods needed in a project

implementation are often versatile. For example, a small sub-activity, where

implementation needs utilisation of rare tacit knowledge, may crucially render the

outcome of a project.

Top management – attitude and support

Top management is a critical success factor in project-based firms. A study

covering both macro and micro aspects of KM in Indian ACM firms finds that for

successful KM initiatives, the active involvement and support of top management

is one of the most crucial prerequisites (Pillania, 2006). Management leadership

and support is one of the 11 critical success factors (CSF) for implementing KM

in Engineering firms (Wong, 2005). Leadership plays a critical role in a

company’s KM efforts (DeTienne 2004). Leadership has an ionizing role, as it

generates and sets the direction for energy in an organisation (Lloyd & Stewart,

2002). Rajat Gupta, McKinsey’s Managing Director, initiated a strong personal

involvement and investment to make sure his company took on knowledge

development efforts (Singh, 2001).

Leaders should determine what knowledge is valuable for the firm in the first

place and then determine how best to distribute knowledge (DeTienne, 2004).

Top managers must strategically decide which KM efforts to support and develop

and then must follow that strategy (Takeuchi, 2001). Leadership plays an

important role in creating and communicating the knowledge vision of the


23

company, facilitating and utilising the shared space effectively, and

understanding the knowledge assets of the firm in order to facilitate the

knowledge-creating process (Nonaka, 2002). Top managers must articulate a

‘grand theory’ of what the company as a whole ought to be (Takeuchi, 2001).

Asking the right questions and the ability to listen to answers and apply the

knowledge gained are vital aspects of a leadership role. Leadership needs to

bring the knowledge issues to the surface and then make sure they are included

in board discussions about strategy (Lloyd & Stewart, 2002). Top management

must incorporate its vision for KM into the company’s corporate objectives or

policy statement (Takeuchi, 2001).

Rajat Gupta stresses that when he started as managing director, one of the most

important things he emphasized was making sure they were in the forefront of

knowledge (Singh, 2001). Management responsibilities in the KM process include

motivating employees; providing equal opportunities and development; and

measuring and rewarding the performance, behaviours and attitudes that are

required for effective KM (Beckman, 1999). Leadership styles that involve human

interaction and encourage participative decision-making processes are positively

related to the skills and traits that are essential to KM (Politis, 2001).

2.4.3 Factors affecting knowledge sharing in an org anisation

There are numerous factors that either advance or weaken knowledge sharing

possibilities in a project work context. The following sub-sectors describe factors:

which are highly related to ACM projects.

Project leadership

Leadership in a project that creates new knowledge is largely a matter of giving

people creative freedom within a framework devised by the leader. To do that,

the leader must know enough about the field of specialisation to be equipped to


24

judge performance in relation to context. Furthermore, the members of a project

team can succeed only if its leader is aware that the height of his personal

aspiration will determine the quality of the products/ services the project creates.

In the case of new task, the project manager works at developing what Boam and

Sparrow (1992) have termed ‘transitional competencies’. The need for

transitional competencies arises when people are given tasks they are unfamiliar

with, and fraught with conflict, stress, or uncertainty. Under the guidance of a

project manager who has some experience of the task at hand, a team member

can go through a learning process in which she or he creates the explicit and

tacit knowledge required to accomplish the task.

Motivation

Motivation is an internal psychological process, which states, reinforces, directs

and supports goal-directed behaviour. In engineering projects the question is

often how to get people interested in projects and involved in project processes.

Motivation generally means how to keep a person’s interest and how to keep him

going despite difficulties (Buchanan and Huczynski, 1997).

Osterloh and Frey (2000) make a distinction between extrinsic (financial rewards;

for example a percentage of project value is given team members after finishing

project within project evaluation parameters time, cost and quality) and intrinsic

(undertaken for one’s need for satisfaction; for example employee of the year,

outstanding technician award) motivational approaches. They argue that intrinsic

motivations are crucial when tacit knowledge is to be transferred between teams

and team members, as explicit motivations are unlikely to work because the

transfer of tacit knowledge cannot easily be observed or attributed to an

individual. They propose that the tendency to hoard knowledge will be reduced if

control mechanisms match the nature of the task and motivational factors.

Intrinsic motivation is a key driver of knowledge sharing. Extrinsic interventions,

such as rewards and evaluations, may even adversely affect knowledge sharing


25

motivation because they appear to redirect attention from ‘experimenting’ to

following the rules or technicalities of performing a specific task.

According to Barkley and Saylor (1994), motivation is the behaviour of an

individual whose energy is selectively directed toward a goal. Performance is the

result of having both the ability and the motivation to do a task. These authors

argue that motivation depends on satisfying the needs of individuals.

Traditionally, motivation was equated with extrinsic rewards such as

compensation, promotion, and additional benefits, and clothing (Maslow’s

hierarchy of need, Maslow 1943). ‘Today, people need to be motivated by a

higher order of needs, such as a sense of belonging, a feeling of

accomplishment, improved self-esteem, and opportunities for personal growth’

(Barkley and Saylor, 1994:191).

‘Knowledge is power’ is a well-known line to describe situations where people

with rare knowledge have the highest reputation of knowledge sharing. Ego can

play in important role in the knowledge sharing process (Brown and Starkey,

2000). According to Davenport and Prusak (1998), especially in situations where

job security is low, knowledge as a power base becomes vital for an individual,

and private knowledge may be even as a kind of insurance against losing a job.

In ACM projects these kinds of issues will occur in between project engineers.

People rarely give away something without expecting anything in return. Hall

(2003) argues that knowledge is a private commodity and it is up to the owner to

decide whether to share it or not. Thus, to entice project team members to share

their knowledge as part of a social exchange transaction they need to be

persuaded it is worth doing so. The stakeholders in a project work context expect

mutual reciprocity that justifies the expense in terms of time and energy spent

sharing their knowledge.

A lack of motivation to actively share knowledge across project boundaries leads

to less than optimal project performances. Such lack of sharing impedes the


26

optimal development of projects (Pinto and Onsrud, 1995), and also hinders the

development and utilisation of a project technology’s full potential (Frank, 1992).

Such impediments to sharing are both technological and cultural in nature, with

the latter often being harder to overcome.

In ACM organisation can introduce management activities like 5S, Quality circle,

Total quality management (TQM) which will promote exchange of knowledge

among engineers and technicians. Members involved in such activities can be

given financial rewards and free company sponsored external training.

In ACM projects, project engineers and project team members often compete

directly with each other through their special knowledge and talents (Disterer,

2001). It may be part of the individual culture of high-performing employees that

they voluntarily enter into competition for scare seats on a career path (Project

engineer: only few positions available in ACM organisation) because they like to

compete and to excel on principle (Quinn, 1996). But the drawback of such

competition is obvious: people are very cautions to share their knowledge openly

with colleagues, because they will possibly give up an individual edge. In these

cases competition and the corresponding incentives and rewards often urge

people to build a unique expertise in a certain area, and in order to prove that

expertise – e.g relations to clients or whom to ask to solve problems- they do not

share it with colleagues.

Transferring knowledge may also be seen as an additional chore because

communication takes time (Disterer, 2001). Some individuals may not expect any

reciprocal benefit from transferring their knowledge because they do not believe

in this benefit or they do not experience it necessary. Even if individuals do

expect a payback for their contributions, an answer to the natural question ‘what

is in it for me?’ is often not clear for those people who suffer from a lack of

motivation. According to Quinn (1996), there is a need for employees to have


27

some self-motivated creativity and some sense of ‘care-why’ in order to foster

knowledge sharing.

Summing up, to achieve successful knowledge sharing, projects and ACM

companies need to convince people to reject the old-fashioned way of thinking

that they are being measured by what they know and do individually. Such

thinking only perpetuates knowledge hoarding and the development of

‘knowledge repositories’ from which little value- adding transfer takes place. One

way by which this can be achieved to build conscious knowledge sharing practice

into daily work process such as performance appraisal (Robertson ad

Hammersely, 2000; McDermott and O’Dell, 2001). Reward and appraisal

systems can encourage people to participate in knowledge sharing activities in a

way that it can be seen to be valued by the company. They can reinforce and

convey the desired culture by providing tangible evidence of what it values. The

efforts of the company to reward those individuals and teams who share their

knowledge in a spirit of collaboration and innovation are therefore congruent with

creating the type of learning organisation. The concurrent emphasis on rewarding

project team performance rather than just the excellence of the individual is also

supportive in a project work context (Thomas, A.J, Barton. R, and John,

E.G, 2008)

Example for a team based performance appraisal will be employees get a

percentage (5-10%) of company turnover (total business in dollars) in this every

project team and other team members will share knowledge for company

productivity and profits.

Knowledge-based trust

Most organisational relationships are rooted in knowledge-based trust (a ‘thick’

form of trust) (Shapiro1992; Lewicki and Bunker, 1996). That is, trust is based on

the behavioural predictability that comes from the history of interaction. It exists

when an individual has adequate knowledge about someone to understand his


28

well enough to be able to predict considerably accurately his behaviour.

According to Shapiro (1992; 369), mutual trust results from predictability, for it

produces a ‘Self-fulfilling prophecy’ effect. People often act co-operatively

towards those they expect to be co-operative, and this action encourages the

receivers of co-operative gestures to reciprocate in kind. This kind knowledge

trust can developed in ACM companies in between engineers and technicians

who come from same universities, same language and region.

The repair of violated knowledge-based trust is problematic, because the

violation presents a direct threat to the victim’s self image and self-esteem.

According to Lewicki and Bunker (1996), violation of knowledge-based trust

suggests that the victim has been very wrong about the violator (i.e he does not

know that person as well as he previously thought). This kind of situation occur in

ACM Company, when many people are competing for few top-level positions

(only few project engineer positions available)

Organisational culture and Project culture

Since the final product of a delivery consists of the work of several experts in

various fields, the cultures of the basic organisation and of the various

professional groups meet. Different professions (different department engineers

and technicians) typically have their own cultures and ways of working that are

not necessarily in harmony with the rules of the project (Ruuska, 1999). When

various cultures are effectively joined, the result is a project organisation that is

able to mediate the message widely and get everyone working for a common

goal. A good project culture therefore requires a directing whole which consists of

an organisational culture and a strong professional culture (Figure 2.6) in ACM

projects factory manager or top-level management should not even attempt to

unite the various professional cultures but rather seek appropriate modes of co-

operation and communication for the project at hand.


Figure 2.6: ACM Project culture (Source: Ruuska, 1999)

In the opinion of Brown and Eisenhardt (1997), culture is important in

encouraging team members to share kn

successful project organisations appear to be good places to work and share

knowledge. In these types of atmospheres interpersonal communication tends to

be non-problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organi

may not be the transfer to tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, but the

‘bumping up’ of knowledge one level so that it becomes part of the decision

making process of the project team and project

Attitude

The attitudes of people

1998) in their life. They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or

unfavourable manner in a given circumstance and situation, and involve

evaluations based on individual’s feelings. Accor

attitudes are more enduring than opinions and have an impact on individual’s

motivation. They can result in prejudices and stereotypes, such as the negative

attitudes towards projects’ ‘after

N6211216 BEN910

culture


encouraging team members to share knowledge and, according to them,



problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organi



making process of the project team and project-based company.

The attitudes of people connect their beliefs and values with feelings (Brown,

They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or


evaluations based on individual’s feelings. According to Jashapara (2004),



attitudes towards projects’ ‘after-action reviews’. All these complicated


29


owledge and, according to them,



problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organisations



based company.

connect their beliefs and values with feelings (Brown,

They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or


ding to Jashapara (2004),



action reviews’. All these complicated processes


30

are realised in the worldviews of project team members in terms of dynamics

between different kinds of meanings.

Assumptions

Basic assumptions are the taken-for-granted solutions to particular problems

(Brown, 1998). They are the ‘theories-in-use (Argyris and Schon, 1978) that

perpetuate organisational routines and single-loop learning. Assumptions are

unconsciously held, making them difficult to confront or make explicit. They are

highly complex interpretations based on individual’s beliefs, values and emotions.

One typology of basic assumptions considers five dimensions (Schein, 1985):

• Whether an organisation dominates the external environment or is dominated by it

• Whether truth and reality are received dogma, rules and procedures, a consequence of debate, or ‘what works’

• Whether people are inherently lazy or self-motivated

• Whether ‘doing’ and work are more primary than ‘being and valuing employees’ private lives’

• Whether human interaction is based on individualism or collectivism

In the opinion of Flannes and Levin (2001), many project team members join a

new project team with a certain amount of ‘baggage’ located in their worldview.

Such baggage can be feelings, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, or expectations

that have a negative tone and are the result of pervious negative personal or

professional experiences of the team member. In essence, the baggage

becomes an impediment to the team member’s active, positive engagement with

the work of the current team. The residual feeling that make up a person’s

baggage become a ‘chip on the shoulder’ that can hinder the team member’s

learning and knowledge sharing. Sources of baggage are located in people’s

worldviews and include;

• Previous or ongoing organisational problems, such as reductions in the work force


• Industry changes

• Health issues

• Career stalling

• Personal problems

2.4.4 Knowledge creation and its issues

Knowledge creation is critical. According to (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995),

creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activi

organisations, and is the defining characteristic of the phenomenon of Knowledge

Management. Hirchheim, Klein and Lyytinen (1995)

knowledge creation process from codes to wisdom. The key challenges for

knowledge-intensive engineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,

mapping, dissemination and creation of knowledge from different perspectives

and for different purposes. It is found that managing knowledge assets in

engineering firms is not easy. It is an integr

which has culture, people, finance, technology and organisational structures at its

core (Egbu 2005).

Figure 2.7 : Knowledge creation process(Source: Hirchheim, Klein & Lyytinen, 1995)

N6211216 BEN910

Industry changes

Personal problems

Knowledge creation and its issues


creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activi


Management. Hirchheim, Klein and Lyytinen (1995) Figure 2.7


ngineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,



engineering firms is not easy. It is an integrated and complex social process,


: Knowledge creation process (Source: Hirchheim, Klein & Lyytinen, 1995)


31


creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activity for


2.7 illustrate the


ngineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,



ated and complex social process,



32

Research study finds strong links between innovation, sales growth and a

preference for: expanding R&D, pursuing incremental process change, new

product development, and finding new export markets (Bagchi-Sen, 2001).

“Innovators” are more likely to experience growth than non innovators (Freel,

2000). Engineering firms enhance their performance and competitive advantage

by a more conscious and systematic approach to Knowledge Management

(Salojarvi, 2005).

Problems in knowledge creation

The main constraints are customer dependency, skills and knowledge acquisition

through training, poor learning attitude and networking because of their tradition

of being insular and autonomous (Laforet and Tann, 2006). There are significant

blockages to knowledge creation and use stemming from relational and

managerial rather than technical ignorance. Successful knowledge integration

between partners is considered as a function both of product “clockspeed” and

ability of managers to unlearn (Beecham and Cordey-Hayes, 1998). Engineering

firms really suffer with respect to resources is in the area of short-term financing

to enable them to absorb high-risks associated with innovation. Suggest

government and financial institutions focus on enhancing this specific provision

(Julien , 1996).

The attitude towards new knowledge creations is a problem as new knowledge

creation is viewed primarily the job of research and development department.

Also the processes for contributing new knowledge are not streamlined in the

organisation and employees are not aware of it (Pillania, 2005). This work is

focused on big firms. The literature review highlights the importance of

knowledge creation and categorisation and related issues.

2.4.5 IT systems are not KM

From the KM point of view, neither high investments in technology nor high

numbers of hardware and software in a firm are by themselves/per se features

which spell value addition for a firm. In order to make a contribution to the


33

company, the employees in an organisation should have the ability to use the

systems to interpret the results, to convert them into knowledge and to use them

in their work (Fitz-enz, 2001). Therefore, atmosphere should be created whereby

employees share knowledge or information by using communication channels in

an organisation. Working conditions, team working, eagerness to share

knowledge, free expression of opinion can be defined as the main

contribution/inputs of the organisational culture to KM (Bozbura, 2007). The

combination of three elements, that is, people, process and technology reveals

the most crucial factors involved in capturing, disseminating and sharing

knowledge. In order to explore the benefits of knowledge sharing all the three

elements, viz. people, process and technology need to be balanced for the better

working of any organisation. To consider only people and process and neglect

technology will fail to capitalize on IT which enhances the sharing of explicit

knowledge and makes it more widely available. On the other hand, ignoring

people and just focusing on process and technology will lead to resistance to

make any kind of change in the organisation. Finally, to focus only on people and

technology without process runs the risk of the past being automated (Gillingham

and Roberts, 2006).

2.5 Summary of literature review

From the study, the critical factors which can potentially influence KM in an

organisation are identified. The identified factors can be broadly classified as

flows

• Factors affecting the benefits of KM in ACM.

• Factors of the ACM Organisation.

• Factors affecting the Knowledge Sharing in an ACM organisation.

• Factors affecting the Knowledge Creation in ACM.


34

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Research approach

Survey method was used for the research study .survey was method chosen

because it is appropriate method for capturing the industry views and it is also

easy to respond. Survey was conducted namely with industrial experts in Auto

Components Manufacturers (ACM). Industrial experts were asked to give their

views on Knowledge Management KM in ACM. This survey provided an industry

wide macro and micro perspective of KM in ACM. Industrial experts were mostly

from the engineering background with engineering education qualifications and

also have relevant work experience in ACM.

3.2 Research instrument

Structured questionnaire was developed and used for the research purpose. The

questionnaire was pre-tested for checking any bias and was also discussed with

project supervisor. The questionnaire was administered to industrial experts in

various departments related to the clusters/industry/academic, of ACM.

3.3 Contact method

The questionnaires were sent via emails. The emails is sent to around 40-50

industrial experts and around 30 industrial experts responded for this survey.

Most of industrial experts were working in the middle level management in ACM

organisations.

3.4 Data analysis

The data so collected were analysed with appropriate statistical measures.


35

. Figure 3.1: Survey result of Ques: 1

The majority of industry professionals responded that the KM in their organisation

is at introduction stage. The keys highlight of this survey (Figure 3.1) are number

of responses for KM at growth stage and zero responses for not in existence,

which shows now most or all of the ACM companies understand the importance

of KM. Also more than 80% for industry experts recognise knowledge as a part of

their asset base. Since the ACM industry is now moving more towards into

customised products, which creates a huge demand for knowledge economy

rather than production economy based on previous ACM market structure, where

the number of products was less in market, more importance was given for mass

production.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Not in existence at

all

Nascent or Budding

stage

Introduction stage Growth stage


36

Figure 3.2: Survey result of Ques: 3

Figure 3.2 shows that industry experts have lack of information about KM

process and tools. Lack of motivation creates poor sharing of knowledge in the

organisation and in projects, which is also supported in literature review section

(factors affecting sharing). Other huge problem is key employee leaving

organisation or projects, in case of ACM projects the project team members are

work on project for shorter duration, so it is difficult to identify main knowledge

resources and capturing them. Since most of KM in ACM companies in

introduction stage and budding stage the information overload and reinventing

the wheel issues are likely to affect the KM.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Lack of Information Information

overload

Reinventing the

wheel

Loss of crucial

knowledge due to

a key employee

leaving the

organisation

Poor sharing of

knowledge in the

organisation


37


Some of the responds KM is implenmented in some other name like Total quality

management(where major project issues are identified and solutions are

created), Quality circle (where a team of experts join together identifies and

solves a major problem or a process which need improvement in organisations

and projects), 5S,ISO (where process and daliy funtioning are documented).

Figure 3.3 shows that about 60% of responds identifies KM is benefical to

organisation, but some them not able to identfiy full benefits of KM. Also 50% of

them recongises stored knowledge is important and it needs to be upadting

regularly. 90% respondents think that it takes more than week for an employee to

get the relevant knowledge in ACM.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Never heard of

it

Something

they are

already doing

but not under

the same name

It is just a

management

fad

It is strategic

part of their

business

Something that

could be

beneficial for

the

organisation


38


According to this survey (Figure 3.4) 60% believe that knowledge creation is

everybody job. Which also highlights knowledge need to be captured from all

levels of management and all employees (knowledge creation). 33% suggests

top management should take active interset and allocate resource and time for

KM. which is also supported in literature review section(Top mgt). Also this

survey suggests(60%) that senoir management identifies KM is very important

and it provides less support and it looses its interset (26%) after beginning stage.

this knid of attitude of senior management may be due to expected outcome may

not achieved from KM. Also in terms of finacincal value the knowledge may be

weighed as less or no importance and it is diificult to access knowledge

evaluation and knowledge value addition towards organisation and projects.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

It’s the job of R&D

department only

They view it as

everyone’s job and

everybody contributes

to it

Top management takes

active interest in it and

supports it

continuously

It’s part of our

organisational

philosophy & culture


39


Figure 3.5 shows that, Transfer of knowledge and best practices (46%) and

innvation and knowledge creation (40%) are the main startegies used by ACM for

KM. since this majoirty of survey responents were form engineering backgroud

they relates Km to above stratgies. Respondents from business or marketing

background will give more importance to sustomer-focused and also Km as

business strategy. Also in ACM companies engineering and marketing & sales

has viewed into different ways. KM in ACM should be different for engineering

and marketing & sales.

Less support to “Communities of Practice(CoP’s)” and unable to identity CoP’s in

ACM organisation highlights the importance of organisation culture, professional

and project culture in KM . Internet, Intranet and Automated Manufacturing are

the most common technologies that are implemented in ACM for KM. Only (9%)

from this survey ACM companies uses Knowledge management software, which

indicates most of ACM companies identifies, captures and stores knowledge

through their existing or simple systems.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

KM as a business

strategy

Transfer of

knowledge & best

practices

Customer focused

knowledge

Personal

responsibility for

knowledge

Innovation and

knowledge

creation


40


The survey responses (Figure 3.6), shows that lack of motivation and

recongistion from senoir management affects heavily in KM. In some ACM

organisations indididual knowledge is probally its competive advantage and its

possibly provides him job security so the individual is less likely to share

knowledge. Team-based rewards and recognition will pomote knowledge

sharing. Knowledge sharing activity should be provided with engough resource

and time so that everybody recongises importance of knowledge sharing.

02468

10121416

Functional

silos

Lack of

participation

Not willing to

share

knowledge

Lack of trust Knowledge

sharing not a

part of daily

work

Lack of

training

Lack of

rewards/

recognition for

knowledge

sharing


41


Lack of training and lack of time to learn are the biggest problems in using IT for

KM. the biggest hurdle of KM in ACM is determining what kind of knowledge to

be managed & making it available, because it involves many people and it also

depends the each and everyone view towards knowledge capturing, storing and

sharing. A knowledge can be useful to one and useless information to other one.

Developing a knowledge sharing is culture is also very difficult to create in

organisations; a good knowledge sharing culture will change people’s behaviour

from knowledge hoarding to knowledge sharing (Figure 3.7).

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Changing

people’s

behaviour

from

knowledge

hoarding to

knowledge

sharing

Lack of

understanding

of KM and its

benefits

Determining

what kind of

knowledge to

be managed &

making it

available

Justifying the

use of scarce

resources for

KM

Lack of top

management

commitment

to KM

Overcoming

technological

limitations

Attracting &

retaining

talented

people


42

4 Limitations of Research project

Although carefully researched, documented and analyzed, this research project

is subject to some limitations. Industry expert’s input to questionnaire will depend

upon their exposure or understanding about knowledge management. Some

related technical and management person have less understanding about

knowledge management will have significant impact in this research project. Not

many literature articles available on Automobile Components Manufacturers

(ACM) industries, which creates a generalist approach in this research project,

even existing literatures available on ACM industries are based on bigger firms

like Toyota, Ford etc or a country based, like India, Japan, U.S.A. etc…The 30

responses survey may not give the whole picture of ACM industries and the

results depend upon the KM implementation in those 30 ACM industries.

5 Results and Discussions

Knowledge Management (KM) has assumed a key position in today’s business

scenario, characterized by drastic and sporadic changes. Knowledge sharing is

one of the core tasks whose application in Automobile Components

Manufacturers (ACM) cannot defer if they wish to maintain their competitive

position. There have been various initiatives by firms towards better adoption of

KM activities but companies especially ACMs are still weak in utilizing their

employees’ knowledge. The approach of this project was to assess the

implementation of KM practices in auto component companies. A total of 30 were

participated in the survey for this research project. Results show that companies

do not consider KM as a management fad; they acknowledge the fact that it is

beneficial in the current scenario. In majority of the companies surveyed in the

study, Internet/ Intranet emerged as the most extensively used method for

knowledge sharing, followed by automated manufacturing. The human resources

are the most important asset of the organisation, since they are the source of

ingenuity.

Knowledge and skills possessed by the employees of the organisation is

considered as one of the most critical elements affecting the work performance of


43

the company. However, only the existence of embedded knowledge is not

enough for a company’s good performance, the organisations need to create a

culture of sharing this knowledge. Even though they acknowledge the benefits of

KM, in practice the findings revealed that information was not openly shared.

According to experts, IT (Information Technology) tools are more in use in bigger

ACMs as compared to small and medium enterprise (SME) ACMs. A well

developed and aligned KM strategy and active top management participation are

two of the key strategic issues in KM. The studies on KM strategy and the role of

top management have mainly focused on big firms. The requirements and

resources of SMEs are different from big firms. The major problems with IT for

KM are lack of time to learn, everyday use did not integrate into normal working

practice and lack of training. These findings reflect that important factors that

need to be considered in the development of a KM system includes simplicity of

the technology, ease of use, suitability of user needs, relevance of knowledge

content and standardization of a knowledge structure

Without management support, proper training, leadership and committed efforts

to make tacit knowledge explicit, KM in ACM will be less or partial developed

phenomenon or system and it will demoralize project and organisation members.

To improve KM effectiveness KM duties can be included in job duties and

responsibilities and productive knowledge sharing can be measured in

performance appraisal and pay reviews. The manufacturers need to put efforts to

convert the implicit knowledge of the employees into explicit knowledge for all

organisational levels.

6 Conclusion

The manufacturers know that KM is critical for their production but still not given

the required importance to it. There are various factors affecting the KM in ACM

still to be addressed like less knowledge sharing by employees, lack of KM tools,


44

ignorance by top management, etc. These resulted in implementing KM in most

of the organisations in some forms but they are still in inefficient stage.

7 Recommendations for ACM organisations

� Creating a knowledge culture is key successful factor in knowledge

management

� Rewards and recognition plays a key role in knowledge sharing: so

appropriate methods need to be chosen

� Identify the sources of explicit, tactic, codified and uncodified knowledge in

ACM projects and it should be analysed before implementing km in ACM

� Need to a create collaborative work environment among project teams

� Knowledge needs to be created from available engineering codes, data,

and information

� Categorisation project work environment is important to obtain knowledge

from ACM projects

� Top management attitude, interest and support highly affect the KM

effectiveness in ACM projects

� Knowledge creation and sharing has to be nurtured by a set of enabling

conditions;(provide IT system, allocate time for KM for activities, provide

other resources like training, rewards etc)

� KM duties should be included in job duties and responsibilities so that

productive knowledge sharing can be measured in performance appraisal

and pay reviews.


45

List of References Abdo, S. Ahmed (2008), Tool engineering: Organisation and operation, Manufacturing data series, American Society of Tool and Manufaturing engineers, University of Wisconsin,Madison Agustin P-Araos, Kevin D. Barber, J. Eduardo M-Hernandez, Steve E, 2007. Designing a knowledge management tool to support knowledge sharing networks, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, vol 18,2 pg 153-168 (accessed May 19, 2010) Ajmal, M., and K. Koskinen. 2008. Knowledge Transfer in Project-Based Organisations: An Organisational Culture Perspective. Project Management Journal 39, no. 1, (March 1): 7-15 http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 11, 2010) Anell,B.I and Wilson T.L(2002). Organising in two methods: on the merging of the temporary and the permanent, in K. Sahlin- Anderson and A.soderholm (eds), Beyond Project Management. Malmo:Liber Argysis, C and Schon,D.A (1978) Organisational Learning: A Theory of action Perspective. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley Awad, E. M and Ghaziri, H. M (2004). Knowledge Management, Upper sadle river, Pearson-Prentice hall, New jersey Bagchi-Sen, S. (2001), “Product innovation and competitive advantage in an area of industrial decline: the Niagara region of Canada”, Technovation, Vol. 21 No. 1, pg. 45-54 Balasubramanian P, Nochur K, Henderson J C and Kwan M M (1999), “Managing Process Knowledge for Decision Support”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 27, November, pg. 145-162 Barkley, B.T and Saylor, J.H (1994). Customer-Driven Project Management.Boston: Mcgraw-hill Beecham, M. and Cordey-Hayes, M. (1998), “Partnering and knowledge transfer in the UK motor industry”, Technovation, Vol. 18 No. 3, pg. 191-205 Boam,R and Sparrow,P.(1992). Designing and Achieving Competency. London: Mcgraw-hill Boam, R. Sparrow,P. (1992). Designing and achieving competency. London: Mcgraw-hill Bozbura F. Tunc (2007), “Knowledge Management Practices in Turkish SMEs”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 20, No. 2, pg. 209- 221


46

Briner,W. Geddes,M and Hastings,C. (1990).Project Leadership. Aldershot:Gower Brown, A. and Starkey,K. (2000). Organisational identity and learning: a psychodynamic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), pg 102-120 Brown,S. and Eisenhardt,K.(1997). The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organisations. Administrative science quartley, 42, pp1-34 Buchanan,D. and Huczynski,A (1997). Organisational Behaviour: An introductory text. London: Prentice hall Davenport,T.H and Prusak,L. (1998). Working knowledge: how organisations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard business school press Dawes, R.M (1994). House of cards: Psychology and psychotherapy built on myth. New York: Free press Detienne K.B, Dyer . G, Hoopes. C and Harris. S (2004) Toward a model of effective knowledge management and directions for future research: culture, leadership, and CKOs. Journal of Leadership & Organisational Studies 10(4), pg 26–43 Disterer,G. (2001). Individual and social barriers to knowledge transfer. Proceedings of the thirty-fourth annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii Drucker,P.F (1993b). The new society of organisations, in R. Howard (ed), The learning imperative: Managing people for continuous innovation. Cambridge. MA: Harvard business review press Egbu, C.O., Hari, S. and Renukappa, S.H. (2005), “Knowledge management for sustainable competitiveness in small and medium surveying practices”, Structural Survey, Vol. 23 No. 1, pg. 7-22 Fitz-enz J (2001), The ROI of Human Capital, American Management Association, New York, USA Flannes, S.W and Levin,G. (2001). People skills for project managers. Vienna: Management concepts Frank,A.U (1992).Telecommunication and GIS: opportunities and challenges, in P.W. Newton, P.R.Zwart and M.E.Cavill (eds), Networking spatial information systems. London: Belhaven, pg.235-250


47

Freel, M. (2000), “Do small innovating firms outperform non-innovators?”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 14 No. 3, pg. 195-210 Gillingham Helen and Roberts Bob (2006), “Implementing Knowledge Management: A Practical Approach”, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, Vol. 7, No. 1 Hall, H. (2003). Borrowed theory: applying exchange theories in information science research. Library and information science research,25, pg287-306 Hall,R. and Andriani,P. (1999). Operationalising knowledge management concepts: the development of a technique for sharing knowledge in new product development projects. International journal of innovation management 3 (3), pg 307-333 Hansen MT, Nohria N and Tierney T (1999), “What’s Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77, No. 2, pg. 106-118 Hansen, M.T. (1999), “The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organisation subunits”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 1, pg. 82-111 Hirschheim, R., Klein, H., and Lyytinen, K. (1995) Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, Chap. 2, 6, and 7 Jashapara, A (2004). Knowledge Management. An Integrated approach. Harlow: Pearson education Ltd Julien, P.A., Stpierre, J. and Beaudoin, R. (1996), “Innovation in small business, new technologies and their financing – an overview of recent research”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 13 No. 2, pg. 332-46 Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992), “Knowledge of the firm, combative capabilities and the replication of technology”, Organisation Science, Vol. 3 No. 3, pg. 383-97 Koskinen,K.U.(2004). Knowledge management to improve project commmunication and implementation. Project management journal, 35(2), pg 13-19 Kotnour T (2000). Organisational learning practices in the project management environment. International journal of quality and reliability management, 17, pg 393-406 Laforet, S. and Tann, J. (2006), “Innovative characteristics of small manufacturing firms”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 13 No. 3, pg. 363-74


48

Lakshman C and Parente Ronaldo C (2008), “Supplier-Focused Knowledge Management in the Automobile Industry and Its Implications for Product Performance”, Journal of Management Studies, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Vol. 45, No. 2, pg. 317-342 Leonard-Barton,D. and Sensiper, S.(1998).The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California management review, 40(3), pg 112-132 Lewicki,R.J. and Bunker,B.B. (1996). Developing and manintaining trust in work relationships, in R.M Kramer and T.R.Tyler (eds), Trust in organisations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand oaks, CA:sage Lloyd. B and Stewartta, (2002) Leadership and knowledge management. Leadership & Organisational Development Journal 23(5/6), pg 288–292 Love P.E.D, Fong P.S.W and Irani Z (2005b). Buliding a learning organisation in a project-based environment in Love P.E.D, Fong P.S.W and Irani Z . Management of knowledge in Project Environments. Amsterdam: Elsevier Lundin,R.A. and Soderholm,A.(1995). A theory of the temporary organisation. Scandinavian journal of management, 11(4), pg 437-455 Maria P. Salmador Sanchez, and Angeles Palacios. M 2008. Knowledge-based manufacturing enterprises: evidence from a case study. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 19, no. 4, (May 20): 447-468. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 19, 2010) Maslow,A.H.(1943). Preface to motivation theory. Pschosomatic medicine, 5, pg 85-92 McDermott, R. and O’Dell,C. (2001). Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of knowledge management, 5(1), pg 76-85 Nonaka. I, Toyama. R and Konnon. N (2002) SECI, ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. In Managing Knowledge: An Essential Reader (Little. S, Quintas. P and Ray. T, Eds), pg 13–43, Open University and Sage Publication, London Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H. (1995a). The knowledge-creating company. New York: Oxford university press Nonaka I and Takeuchi H (1995b), The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York


49

Nooteboom, B.(1996). Globalisation, learning and strategy. EMOT workshop. Durham: University of Durham Osterloh, M and Frey, B. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organisational forms. Organisation science, 11(5), pg 538-550 Otala,L.(1996). Benefit of Learning- Competitiveness in the change process. Provoo:WSOY Pillania, R.K. (2005), “IT strategy for knowledge management in Indian industry”, Journal ofInformation and Knowledge Management (JIKM), Vol. 4 No. 3, pg. 32-43 Pillania, R.K. (2004), “State-of-art of knowledge management in Indian industry”, Management and Change, Vol. 9 No. 1, pg. 41-7 Pinto,J.K and Onsrud, H.J (1995). Sharing geographic infromation across organisational boundaries: a research framework, in H.J Onsurd and G. Rushton (eds), Sharing geographic information. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for urban policy research, pg 44-64 Politis J.D (2001) The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge management. Leadership & Organisational Development Journal 22(7/8), pg 354–365 Quinn,J.B, Anderson, P. and Finkelstein, S. (1996). Managing professional intellect: making the most of the best. Harvard business review, 74(2), pg 71-80 Riege, A., and M. Zulpo. 2007. Knowledge Transfer Process Cycle: Between Factory Floor and Middle Management. Australian Journal of Management 32, no. 2, (December 1): 293-314. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed March 19, 2010) Robertson, M and Hammersley, G.(2000). Knowledge management practices within a knowledge-intensive firm: the significance of the people management dimension. Journal of European industrial training, 24, pg 241-253 Ruuska,K.(1999). Project under control. Helsinki: Suomen Atk-kustannus Oy Salojarvi, S., Furu, P. and Sveiby, K. (2005), “Knowledge management and growth in Finnish SMEs”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pg. 103-22 Schein, E.H. (1985). How culture forms, develops and changes, in R.H. Kilmann, M.J Saxton and R.Serpa(eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Shapiro,D. Sheppard, B.H. and Cheraskin, L. (1992). Business on a handshake. The negotiation journal, (8), pg 365-378


50

Shelda Debowski. (2006) Knowledge management, Milton, Qld.: John Wiley & Sons Australia, ch 2 Singh. J (2001) McKinsey’s managing director Rajat Gupta on leading a knowledge-based global consulting organisation. The Academy of Management Executive 15(2), pg 34–44 Spencer, Jr, L.M and Spencer, S. (1993). Competence at work. Models for superior performance. New York: John Wiley & Sons Takeuchi. H (2001) Toward a universal management concept of knowledge, In Managing Industrial Knowledge (Nonaka. I and Teece. D, Eds), pg 315–329, Sage Publications, London Thomas, A.J, Barton. R, and John, E.G, 2008. Advanced manufacturing technology implementation :A review of benefits and a model for change. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 57, no. 2, (February 15): 156-176. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 19, 2010) Thomas R Cutler. 2006. Project-based manufacturers face challenges, find success. Tooling & Production, December 1, 35-36. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed June 11, 2010) Tissen, R., Andriessen, D. and Deprez,L.(2000). The knowledge dividend. London: Prentice Hall Tsoukas, H. and Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organisational knowledge? Journal of management studies, 38 (7), pg 973-993 Turner, J.R and Keegan, A. (1999). The management of operations in the project- based organisation, in K.Artto, K.Kahkonen and K.Koskinen (eds), Managing business by projects. Helsinki: Project management association Finland Vesa Peltokorpi, and Emiko Tsuyuki. 2006. Knowledge governance in a Japanese project-based organisation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, February 1, 36-45. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 11, 2010) Wong K.Y (2005) Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. Industrial Management, Data Systems 105(3/4), pg 261–280 Yuri W. Ramirez, and Harry J. Steudel. 2008. Measuring knowledge work: the knowledge work quantification framework. Journal of Intellectual Capital 9, no. 4, (October 1): 564-584. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 19, 2010)


51

Cover Letter of Survey

May 18th, 2010

Dear Sir/Madam,

Application of Knowledge Management system in Proje ct based

manufacturing industry (Auto Components Manufacturi ng)

There has been a considerable interest in Knowledge Management system in

Auto components manufacturing (ACM) industries in the recent past. We are

conducting a research to investigate the current status of the lean practices that

are implemented in the various organisations and its effectiveness. As a part of

this research we are sending out questionnaires to selected Auto components

manufacturing organisations. The major objectives and potential benefits of the

survey to be conducted are outlined below.

Objectives: The main objectives of this survey are:

� To review the current status of Knowledge Management system that is

implemented in ACM

� To make out the reasons for implementing/not implementing Knowledge

Management system in ACM

� To identify the benefits from Knowledge Management system

Benefits: This research offers significant benefits to the participating

organisations in the following ways:

� This research will recognise areas of current and future manufacturing

improvement activities and the participants will be given a copy of the

analysis of the survey results if requested

� The results of the analysis will be used to provide practical advice to

manufacturing organisations in the form of guidelines and will be given to

the participants


52

We sincerely hope that you will participate in this proposed research and

complete and return the questionnaire to us. The responses provided in this

survey will be treated as strictly ‘private and confidential’ information. At no stage

will any of the information relating to specific organisations be divulged to third

parties. The survey will take about 10 to 15 minutes to complete. You can email

your response.

If you have any queries regarding this survey and ongoing research please

contact Gowri Shankar at [email protected]

Thank you for your consideration.

Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar Dr. Assoc Prof Bambang Trigunarsyah

Post Graduate Student Lecturer in Project Management, QUT


53

QUESTIONNAIRE

Name : _________________ Designation : __________________

Organisation : _________________

1. What is the current status of Knowledge Management in Auto Components Manufacturers (ACM )?

a) Not in existence at all b) Nascent or Budding stage

c) Introduction stage d) Growth stage

2. Do ACM recognise knowledge as a part of their asset base?

a) Yes b) No c) Can’t say

3. What are the problems of ACM ?

a) Lack of Information

b) Information overload

c) Reinventing the wheel

d) Loss of crucial knowledge due to a key employee leaving the organisation

e) Poor sharing of knowledge in the organisation

4. What do ACM think of Knowledge Management (KM)?

a) Never heard of it

b) Something they are already doing but not under the same name

c) It is just a management fad

d) It is strategic part of their business

e) Something that could be beneficial for the organisation

5. What do you think of stored knowledge in ACM ?

a) It’s quite important, relevant and latest

b) It’s quite important, relevant but not updated regularly

c) It’s just trivial, a part of formalities and of no use

6. How much time does it take for an employee to get the relevant knowledge in ACM ?

a) A few minutes c) A few days

b) A few hours d) Week or more

7. Which of the following best describes ACM with respect to new knowledge creation?


54

a) It’s the job of R&D department only

b) They view it as everyone’s job and everybody contributes to it

c) Top management takes active interest in it and supports it continuously

d) It’s part of our organisational philosophy & culture

8 Which one of the following strategy ACM use for KM?

a) KM as a business strategy

b) Transfer of knowledge & best practices

c) Customer focused knowledge

d) Personal responsibility for knowledge

e) Innovation and knowledge creation

9. What is the attitude of senior management with respect to KM in ACM ?

a) Sees it as very important and provides full support

b) Sees it as very important but hardly supports it

c) Sees it as a waste and hardly bothers

d) Was very supportive in the beginning but now lost interest

10. Which of the following best describes ACM culture?

a) Their basic values & purpose emphasise on sharing of knowledge

b) They have an open, encouraging & supportive culture

c) They think knowledge management is each and everybody’s job and so everybody have the best of knowledge

d) The prevailing notion is that the knowledge management is the task of a few designated ones and there is no need for knowledge sharing

11. Do ACM actively create and support “Communities of Practice*(CoP’s)” in their organisation?

a) Yes b) No c) Can’t say

* An informal, self-organising group of people in the organisation, brought together by common interest who share expertise and solve problems together.

12. What are the biggest cultural barriers in knowledge management in ACM ?

a) Functional silos

b) Lack of participation

c) Not willing to share knowledge

d) Lack of trust

e) Knowledge sharing not a part of daily work


55

f) Lack of training

g) Lack of rewards/ recognition for knowledge sharing

13. Which technologies have ACM implemented?

a) Internet b) Data warehousing

c) Intranet d) Knowledge management software

e) Extranet f) Decision support system

g) Groupware h) Data management system

i) E Commerce j) Automated Manufacturing

14. What are the problems faced by ACM in using IT for Knowledge Management?

a) Lack of training

b) System too much complicated

c) Lack of identifying the proper IT tool

d) Lack of time to learn

e) Lack of user uptake due to insufficient communication

f) Every day use did not integrate into normal working practice

g) Unsuccessful due to technical problems

15. What are the biggest hurdles in effective implementation of KM in ACM ?

a) Changing people’s behaviour from knowledge hoarding to knowledge sharing

b) Lack of understanding of KM and its benefits

c) Determining what kind of knowledge to be managed & making it available

d) Justifying the use of scarce resources for KM

e) Lack of top management commitment to KM

f) Overcoming technological limitations

g) Attracting & retaining talented people

If you wish to make any further suggestions on any of these issues, please do so here:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your kind co-operation.


56

Survey Results

Question 1 %

Not in existence at all 0.00 0

Nascent or Budding stage 10.00 3

Introduction stage 60.00 18

Growth stage 30.00 9

30

Question 2

Yes 83.33 25

No 10.00 3

Can’t say 6.67 2

30

Question 3

Lack of Information 30.77 12

Information overload 0.00 0

Reinventing the wheel 5.13 2

Loss of crucial knowledge due to a key employee leaving the organisation 25.64 10

Poor sharing of knowledge in the organisation 38.46 15

39

Question 4

Never heard of it 6.67 2

Something they are already doing but not under the same name 26.67 8

It is just a management fad 0.00 0

It is strategic part of their business 6.67 2

Something that could be beneficial for the organisation 60.00 18

30

Question 5

It’s quite important, relevant and latest 33.33 10

It’s quite important, relevant but not updated regularly 53.33 16

It’s just trivial, a part of formalities and of no use 13.33 4

30

Question 6

A few minutes 0.00 0

A few hours 0.00 0

A few days 10.00 3

Week or more 90.00 27

30

Question 7

It’s the job of R&D department only 0.00 0

They view it as everyone’s job and everybody contributes to it 60.00 18

Top management takes active interest in it and supports it continuously 33.33 10


57

It’s part of our organisational philosophy & culture 6.67 2

30

Question 8

KM as a business strategy 6.67 2

Transfer of knowledge & best practices 46.67 14

Customer focused knowledge 6.67 2

Personal responsibility for knowledge 0.00 0

Innovation and knowledge creation 40.00 12

30

Question 9

Sees it as very important and provides full support 13.33 4

Sees it as very important but hardly supports it 60.00 18

Sees it as a waste and hardly bothers 0.00 0

Was very supportive in the beginning but now lost interest 26.67 8

30

Question 10

Their basic values & purpose emphasise on sharing of knowledge 20.00 6

They have an open, encouraging & supportive culture 20.00 6

They think knowledge management is each and everybody’s job and so everybody

have the best of knowledge 50.00 15

The prevailing notion is that the knowledge management is the task of a few

designated ones and there is no need for knowledge sharing 10.00 3

30

Question 11

Yes 16.67 5

No 60.00 18

Can’t say 23.33 7

30

Question 12

Functional silos 0.00 0

Lack of participation 5.66 3

Not willing to share knowledge 22.64 12

Lack of trust 15.09 8

Knowledge sharing not a part of daily work 22.64 12

Lack of training 5.66 3

Lack of rewards/ recognition for knowledge sharing 28.30 15

53

Question 13

Internet 22.95 14

Intranet 26.23 16

Extranet 0.00 0


58

Groupware 0.00 0

E Commerce 0.00 0

Data warehousing 3.28 2

Knowledge management software 9.84 6

Decision support system 8.20 5

Data management system 6.56 4

Automated Manufacturing 22.95 14

61

Question 14

Lack of training 29.17 14

System too much complicated 10.42 5

Lack of identifying the proper IT tool 12.50 6

Lack of time to learn 33.33 16

Lack of user uptake due to insufficient communication 4.17 2

Every day use did not integrate into normal working practice 6.25 3

Unsuccessful due to technical problems 4.17 2

48

Question 15

Changing people’s behaviour from knowledge hoarding to knowledge sharing 19.67 12

Lack of understanding of KM and its benefits 21.31 13

Determining what kind of knowledge to be managed & making it available 24.59 15

Justifying the use of scarce resources for KM 4.92 3

Lack of top management commitment to KM 16.39 10

Overcoming technological limitations 4.92 3

Attracting & retaining talented people 8.20 5

61


59

Project Journal

26 February

Integrated project - I had the first lecture today, for this unit I need to write a10, 000

words report scares me a bit, but I take it as a challenge. This is the first time I will be

writing such a report in my lifetime. The first lecture was about information retrieval,

where got some exposure about new information retrieval skills. Since I am doing

master of project management, I decided to research project on project related

issues, I tried to some research and I thought of doing a research project on

developing a Knowledge Management (KM) system in automobile components

manufacturing industry or analysing the critical factors that affects successes of the

automobile components manufacturing industry projects.

5 March

Today I got lecture on research methodology, where I got and idea about research

methods like experiment, simulation, Quantitative (Interpretive), Qualitative (surveys)

etc. and about types of research like primary and secondary research. I did more

analysis with these research methodologies and processes with respect to my

project topics. I also got a rough idea about how to do a research project by this

lecture.

9 March

Further I did some research on the topics and checked available literature, journals

books and other resources that are related to my topics. And I decide to do my

research project on “An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a

Knowledge management framework or system in project based manufacturing

industry (automobile parts development)”. I sent my project topic to Wim Dekkers.

Then I looked for suitable supervisor for my research project. Then I identified Dr.

Assoc Prof Bambang Trigunarsyah, whose main areas of research is on Knowledge

management in project based organisation which was more related to my research

project, so I seized the opportunity to do this research project for the completion of

my masters degree in Project Management on a topic that well interested me. I sent

a requestion to Bambang for supervising my research project.


60

12 March

Today I got acceptance from Bambang that he agreed to supervise my research

project.

19 march

I started my preliminary project research. I looked at the project proposal instructions

and guidelines from study guide. I looked at few research articles one of them was

“Project-based manufacturers face challenges, find success” from Journal of Tooling &

Production, where the some core technology and process issues are discussed,

which helped to formulate Automobile Components Manufactures (ACM) key issues.

Also I looked at “Knowledge Transfer Process Cycle: Between Factory Floor and Middle

Management” from Australian Journal of Management, in which knowledge management

issues and knowledge transfer process cycle were clearly discussed. Then I

analysed and reflected the research topic with my 6 years of professional experience

and identified knowledge management issues and prepared a rough draft on project

proposal.

26 March

I prepare a proposed timing for each research project sections. Then I submitted

research project proposal. I was convinced that I addressed all instructions and

criteria’s of project proposal as per study guide.

5 April

Now that literature review is partially done, my next thought was on how to proceed. I

had a broad view on KM, but how to understand and customise this for ACM

projects. At the same time I started doing research on ACM projects and refreshed

my previous employment experiences and written detailed background on ACM

industry and it’s functioning. Created ACM organisation structure and project team

structure.

23 April

Sent email for meeting to Bambang to discuss about project proposal


61

27 April

Met Bambang, got project proposal feedback, where he explained the objectives of

the research project are very big for these kinds of shorter duration projects. He

advised me to cut down objectives; I cut 2 main objectives from my project proposal.

I told him I want to prepare a questionnaire and collect industry inputs for my

research. He also mentioned that my referencing was not cited in the project

proposal report. I need to correct this issue in my final report.

6 May

Continued by literature review, from the literature review and also from project

objectives point of view I developed a questionnaire and emailed Bambang to get

approval and feedback. Meanwhile I found an interesting resource, which I studied

for Data resource management unit; it clearly describes the knowledge creation

process (Information Systems Development and Data Modelling). Now I interpreted this

concept with ACM projects and identified some potential sources of knowledge in

ACM. Not got reply from Bambang, then I came to know I need to book an

appointment with school of built and environment office. So I booked an appointment

to meet him 20 May.

20 may

“Met Bambang after a long gap with the questionnaire, findings and proposed format

for the report. He was quiet happy with everything and suggested some changes in

the format and questionnaire. He pointed out that the problem statement issues and

survey results should be included in the results and discussions section. He pointed

out my introduction should include steps I follow to achieve the project goal and

conclusions should indicate how I achieved them. I will start typing the report over

the weekend. ”

I finally developed a survey, with the help of my literature review and I also with the

feed back from my ex- colleagues and friends who are professionals with great


62

knowledge and experience on ACM projects. I have sent to 50 of them, got about 3

responses back. Let’s wait and see how many more responses I can get.

I got about 10 responses for the surveys. I don’t think I have enough time to wait for

more. These responses provided some interesting insights on the attitude of the

industrial experts towards the KM concept and gave an idea on its current usage.

Most of them felt KM is highly beneficial and pointed out the need of implementing it

in ACM.

25 may

I got an extension from Wim and Bambang for the final submission”. Now I observed

that my literature review is too big it was about 15,000 words, I need to cut down

words as much as possible. I tried to put more inputs in literature review section

thinking that I will be short of word in end”. Now most of the analysis is completed.

Meanwhile in the survey I got around 30 responses, and then I did analysis on

survey responses and comments. I observed that some of the academic people

thoughts where matched with industrial experts inputs.

11 June

I finally got the whole report done and complied. I have learned an immense from the

research and studies. The project got delayed due to questionnaire response and

other personal issues.


63

Contact Records


64

Appendix A - Detailed background of ACM Project

ACM (Auto Components Manufactures) project is to manufacture prototype tools to

automobile industries. A prototype tool consists of 30- 40 parts and some standard

parts include screws, nuts, bolts, etc. These parts will be assembled together for

producing automobile components.

Manufacturing a prototype tool involves five stages; they are design, process

planning, machining, assembly and testing. Each process has a separate

department to do the job; other significant departments are quality, Research &

Development (R & D) and Outsourcing & sub-contract (Abdo, S. Ahmed, 2008). The

factory manager is responsible for project team formation and selection of project

team members. For each project, a project engineer will lead and monitor the

project. The project engineer (senior engineer) is an experienced professional from

different departments, who worked at least two or more departments. Senior

engineers are promoted from different departments. Usually ACM projects can be

divided into two types they are:

• Similar or less complex project – Prototype tool can be manufactured by existing technology and process known to company.

• New and complex project – Need extensive research R&D work, and process and technology need to be tested.

Design

Design department will get the product drawing from the marketing department and

do design of proto type tools. Prepare the assembly and detailed drawing of all the

parts. Prepare the raw material list for each tool and issue with the drawing to the

process planning department.

Process planning

Process planning department will get the drawing from the design department and

order the raw material for the parts and also standard parts. Planning the

manufacturing process for all parts and prepared a process planning chart. Planning

department is responsible for the machine allotment for each machining process.


65

Machining

Machining department will get the materials and process planning chart for the parts.

Raw materials are machined as per the part drawing and moved to next process by

following process planning chart. After every machining process parts are sent to the

quality department for inspection.

Assembly

Assembly department will get all the machined parts and start doing assembly.

Assembling process involves some minor machining and fitting works. Assembled

tool sent to the quality department for inspection. After approved from the quality

department tool will be sent to the testing department.

Testing

Testing department will test the tool in the testing machine and trouble shoot to get

the product. Trouble shooting involves fitting, machining and modifying some part of

the tool. Adjust the tool to get the correct dimension of the product then submit the

product to the quality department for checking the dimensions of the product.

Quality

Quality department will check parts, tools and products against required engineering

standards. The quality department supports Machining, Assembly and Testing

departments.

Research and Development (R & D)

Research and Development (R & D) department conducts process evaluation of new

technology and prototype tools. This department also helps to solve issues and

problem in projects.

Outsourcing and sub-contract

Outsourcing and sub-contract department supervise and co-ordinate project

processing activities which will be done sub-contractors and suppliers

Appendix B – ACM Organisation Structure

Factory manager

Senior engineers (project

engineers) (15)

Machining Dept Head

Machining workers (50)

(3 shifts)

Assembly Dept Head

Assembly workers (24) (3 shifts)

ACM Organisation Structure

CEO

R & D engineers

(6)

Design Dept Head

Design Engineer

s (15 )

Process planning

Dept Head

Process Engineer

s (10)

Testing Dept Head

Tool Testers (15)

Quality Dept Head

Quality Inspectors

(9) (3 shifts)

Finance manager

Sales & Marketing manager

Marketing

Customer service Dept

Sales Dept

Marketing Dept

Outsourcing and sub -contract

Dept

Appendix C – ACM Process flow chart

Design Dept

Process planning DeptOutsourcing &

sub -contract Dept

Customer service Dept

Quality Dept

Testing DeptAssembly Dept

Machining Dept

R & D Dept

Marketing Dept

Project Team formation

Customer

Appendix D – ACM Project team structure

R & D Dept (Utilised based upon project

requirement)Project engineer

Designer Process engineerOutsourcing and sub

-contract Department

Machining workers (3-5 people)

Assembly workers (3-5 people)

Tool testers (2-3 people)

Quality inspector

An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

Documents