• No results found

Sharing Knowledge : Strengthen the Internal Collaboration through Implementation of a Communication Tool

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Sharing Knowledge : Strengthen the Internal Collaboration through Implementation of a Communication Tool"

Copied!
63
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Sharing Knowledge

Strengthen the Internal Collaboration through Implementation

of a Communication Tool

Authors:

Sofia Bergqvist

Rikard Gellert

Director of Research:

Dr. Nils Nilsson

Co-tutor:

Prof. Philippe Daudi

Programme:

Master’s Programme in Leadership and

Management in International Context

Research Theme:

Sharing Knowledge, Open Communication & Internal

Collaboration.

Level:

Master

Date:

June 4, 2009

(2)
(3)

Abstract

Authors: Sofia Bergqvist & Rikard Gellert Title: Sharing Knowledge

Level: Master Thesis in Open Innovation and Sharing Knowledge Studies Location: Baltic Business School, University of Kalmar

Language: English Number of page: 54 June 2009

Abstract

The change in the present global world puts pressure on companies to develop new strategies for gaining competitive advantage. The new fast technology leads companies to try to outshine one another to reach further into the world of innovation. Sharing knowledge online demands brave and huge changes from managers and employees. The use of new tools for faster more open communication requires a change of mindset from the involved parties. Our aim was to determine if the internal open communication was the solution to a more open knowledge sharing work climate. The Purpose of our study is to investigate if knowledge sharing indirectly foster a more learning and innovative organization. Which leads us to one of our main questions: can a wikis- tool for internal communication be an enabler for a more open and knowledge sharing working climate? In this thesis we are focusing on the new communication tool for a better internal collaboration which has the ability to facilitate the work for employees if it is implemented in a positive manner. All our research was performed in Ramböll a global company that gave us useful access and information for our thesis. We performed our study by using qualitative research such as interviews, dialogue and observations. The result from our study showed us how the open communication and knowledge sharing can strengthen the core communication to foster a more learning and innovative company. Open communication as enabler of the power of innovation in global companies.

(4)

Acknowledgement

The process of writing our Master Thesis has been rigorous and tedious, but nonetheless has been a great experience. There are many people that have made the road to achieving the completion of our thesis possible.

We would like to start off by thanking our tutors Dr. Nils Nilsson and Prof. Phillipe Daudi for their guidance, knowledge, and support of the subject. We want to thank Dr. Nils Nilsson for helping us whenever we needed from the start of our work to the end. He helped us narrow down and understanding the subject when we only had a broad perspective of what we wanted to write about. We also want to thank him for making himself available whenever we needed it, and without hesitation new exactly what to say because he was always up to date with what we have already completed. We would like to emphasize once again that he was a huge help throughout our entire thesis process. We want to thank Prof. Phillipe Daudi for his excellent feedback, guidelines, and support throughout our thesis process.

We would like to thank Ramböll as a whole for their willingness to help us out and for getting us started in finding the subject that we wanted to write about. We want to give specific thanks to Mr. Dan Engström, Mr. Isao Matsumoto, and Mr. Patrik Lidgren for their time and effort that they gave us and for giving us the time to interview them. We would further thank Mr. Dan Engström for his guidance, how he made himself available whenever we needed and the time and effort that he put into helping us.

We would want to thank Terese Johansson for helping us print out and answer any questions that we had. We want to thank our friends and family for giving us the support that we needed after long studying and writing days. Without you guys we would not have been able to relax and get our minds off of studying so we could regain the required energy that we needed to put forth the next following.

Finally, we would like to thank one another for the great team work, intellectual input, and the required support and motivation to keep us on track. With the help of each other we made it possible to get the best final result. We would like to reiterate, thank you all, without you guys our Master’s Thesis would not have been possible.

(5)

“Knowledge is of two kinds, we know a subject ourselves, or

we know where we can find information on it”

(6)

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

... 1

1.1 Communicate with your peers... 1

1.2 Problem... 2

1.3 Problem Discussion ... 3

1.4 Purpose of the Study ... 4

1.5 Scientific Question ... 4

1.6 Background of the Project... 5

1.7 Our Background... 6

1.8 Limitation ... 7

1.9 Structure of the thesis ... 7

2. Methodology

...8

2.1 Our Role as Researcher

’s

... 8

2.2 Research Approach ... 8 2.3 Qualitative Research ... 9 2.3.1 Research Area ... 10 2.3.2 Data Collection ... 11 2.4 Preparation ... 11 2.5 Implementation ... 13 2.6 Research Quality ... 13

2.6.1 What makes Qualitative Research Trustworthy? ... 13

2.6.2 Consciousness ... 13 2.6.3 Criticism of Sources ... 14

3. Theoretical Framework

... 15 3.1 Conceptual Framework ... 15 3.2 Knowledge Management ... 15 3.3 Knowledge Sharing ... 16

3.3.1 Knowledge Sharing Cycle ... 17

3.3.2 Information ... 18

3.3.3 The Risk of Sharing Information ... 19

3.4 Open Communication ... 19

3.5 Internal Collaboration ... 20

3.5.1 Shared Authorship ... 21

(7)

Table of Contents

3.6.1 Implementation ... 21

3.6.2 Attitude- Learning by doing ... 22

3.6.3 Make Sense to change ... 22

3.6.4 In the mind of the employee ... 22

3.6.5 Management Approach ... 24

3.6.6 Manager’s Expand the Mind for New Technology... 24

3.6.7 Emotional Consequences... 26

3.7 Wikis- Open source software... 26

3.7.1 Open source software... 26

3.7.2 Wikis Background ... 27

3.7.3 The Wikis Culture ... 27

3.7.4 Wikis- A Collaboration Tool ... 28

4. Ramböll Case

... 29

4.1 History... 29

4.2 Blue Ocean Strategy... 30

4.2.1 Background ... 30

4.2.2 Ramböll Establishing Blue Ocean ... 30

4.3 Group Management... 31

4.4 Communication ... 32

4.5 Knowledge Management within Ramböll ... 33

4.6 Knowledge Sharing in Ramböll Today ... 33

4.6.1 Networks ... 34

4.7 Ramböll’s Knowledge Sharing Vision, Mission, and Mindset ... 35

5. Result & Analysis

... 36

5.1 Planning Together... 36

5.2 Gaining More Knowledge ... 37

5.3 Collaborate Internally ... 38

5.4 Sharing Information?... 40

5.5 Knowledge Management ... 40

5.6 The Use of a Collaboration Tool ... 40

5.7 Changing Work Habits ... 42

5.8 The Risk of Change ... 43

6. Discussion

... 45

6.1 Knowledge Management & Sharing Knowledge... 45

(8)

6.3 Implementing Wikis Through Change of Attitude ... 47

7. Conclusion

... 49

7.1 Open Communication ... 49

7.2 Collaboration ... 49

7.3 Managing the Implementation ... 50

7.4 Wikis- Tool ... 50

7.6 Future research topics ... 51

8. Bibliography

...52

8.1 Literature ... 52

8.2 Journal Articles ... 53

8.3 World Wide Source and Other Electronic Sources ... 53

8.4 Oral Sources ... 55

Figures

Figure 1.1Hype Cycle ... 5

Figure 3.1Five-Phase Model... 18

Figure 4.1Ramböll Group Management System ... 31

Figure 4.2Knowledge Management Key Targets... 33

Tables

Table 4.1Knowledge Sharing Table ... 34

(9)

Introduction

1. Introduction

The first chapter includes a brief introduction of our topic and of the situation of the problem. The small discussion of the problem leads us to the purpose of the study and our scientific questions.

1.1 Communicate with your Peers

Over time individuals have developed and demanded new channels and technology for sharing knowledge and communicating online. The different technologies that have been created demands individuals to change their working habits as well as forces them to have an open mind set about new communication tools. Today’s generation is spoiled by the plethora of different techniques and tools for sharing information online. Some of these include open forums, bloggs, facebook, Windows Messenger, wikis, American Online etc. These new tools for sharing knowledge, collaboration and communication have created a sense of acceptance that individual’s did not have before. The Internet has made this possible by being a massive sharing machine. It has also helped the world to be more open and at the same time having no borders with rapid changes.

Knowledge sharing, collaboration, and communication have all increased and become easier because of the Internet, so there is no longer an advantage for individuals to keep their ideas and knowledge to themselves. Therefore, companies are adapting to the idea that if they were to create a strong internal collaborating strategy it would encourage the sharing of knowledge between employees. If companies do succeed in implanting a more knowledge sharing climate it may indirectly foster a more learning and innovative company. One of the tools that may work and make internal collaboration more efficient is wikis. Wikis is an open forum that makes it easy to find co-workers inside a big global company. Wikis could be an enabler for the open communication within the company.

Ramböll, a global engineering and design company that is in the beginning phases of implementing wikis into the office. The company is using wikis in hope of strengthening their internal collaboration and in to achieve to be a more learning and innovative company. If Ramböll can successfully implement wikis into their company than they would hope that the internal collaboration may lead them to be more innovative through sharing knowledge. This is a very rare act in the industry that Ramböll is in. In chapter four we will give a deeper description of Ramböll and what their present situation is.

(10)

1.2 Problem

The newest possible internal communication solution has come from the new playground that companies are able to work in because of the new technological improvements that have occurred over the last couple years. The new playground has given companies the opportunity to use a new tool such as wikis to strengthen their internal collaboration which will allow them to start sharing information with co-workers.

Wikis is a new field for companies that forces their employees to eliminate any borders that they might have in working with new technology. There are some new challenges that could arise for businesses if they start working with wikis as a tool for open communication. The companies that start working with wikis will hope that it will lead them to have a more open and knowledge sharing climate. The combination of all the employees’ networks may lead to them sharing their knowledge and could result in a collaboration strategy that can strengthen the company’s internal collaboration. Companies that want to start using and working with new technology, like wikis, will often face the problem of how to implement the tool into the office and in people’s minds. In this day and age, individuals keep knowledge to themselves because they have been trained and taught that that is what makes them unique and that they would have an advantage over other employees. Companies think that this way of thinking is a little outdated, so they are trying to get employees to share knowledge and collaborate internally to indirectly foster a more learning and innovative organization. By doing this, it will test manager’s ability as a leader and as a manager because they will have to get employees to use wikis and get them to see the opportunity that comes with sharing knowledge, collaborating internally and working with wikis. The power that a company has comes from the employee’s knowledge and if a company has the ability to connect their employees and the knowledge that they have, it may lead to more innovative ideas.

When companies work with knowledge sharing, collaboration, and communication knowledge becomes very important. The reason why knowledge management becomes important is because there is a need to get information successfully throughout the entire company. With a successful knowledge manage there is a higher probability of gaining the competitive advantage. In order for companies to achieve this they need to find and use a proper technology to help their efforts in introducing good knowledge management practices. If it is done successfully then they could accomplish four different results. The results are that companies will be able to capture information, generate ideas, store information, and distribute information. (Economist, 2009)

(11)

Introduction

1.3 Problem Discussion

The business world is always developing which puts pressure on companies, this may be a strong reason for why companies would start working with the open communication process to be able achieve and/or sustain their strong internal collaboration.

Globalization is continuous and affects nearly every business. With the changing globalization it is now becoming more of a necessity for firms to have a knowledge sharing strategy in order to be a more open and innovative company. The knowledge sharing strategy includes internal collaboration of co-workers and this will create a complex business environment and will demand firms to work with new technology. Ramböll is an existing example of a company that is in the multi-disciplinary engineering, design, and consultancy industry that wants to sustain their innovative advantage by working with open communication. They are currently working with openness, sharing knowledge, and wikis.

Ramböll believes that open communication is the logical conclusion for tomorrow’s competitive advantage. The power of communication within employees could be the key for a stronger internal collaboration. Working with a more open communication and internal collaboration can make Ramböll even more interesting for potential new employees. (Engström, 2009)

There is always some new form of technological improvement with having a fast changing environment, which have made the world become both faster and smaller. The technology improvements have made industries more hyper-competitive and therefore both products and services have a shorter lifecycle. Companies have a higher demand in innovation with the short lifecycles. All this is the affect from the global development and the new communicating technology. The new technology affects the way employees work and how they work in certain situations.

Ramböll

Ramböll is a company providing services under seven main areas, in building and design, infrastructure and transport, energy and climate, environment and nature, industry and oil/gas, IT and telecom, and the last one in management and society. Ramböll’s head quarter is located in Stockholm, Sweden. They have 182 offices and five temporary offices in 24 different countries with more than 8,000 employees.

(12)

The dependence of online capabilities has forced and allowed businesses to work with a more open communication to get stronger core collaboration inside the company. Working with open forums companies are able to share information and knowledge with their co-workers.

The online communication while using open forums demands speed and flexibility from employees and managers. This could become more important in the future if a company wants to be more open and innovative. Companies need to keep up with the difficult and fast changing environment, which also requires being proficient in quickly changing, adapting and being the first to gain new knowledge. There is a demand from companies with the new environment to change from being single minded to working with open communication and knowledge sharing to be successful. This change would make them a learning organization and would demand fast and open communication. While working in a learning organization there would be many work changes managers and employees within the company. The technology that helps firms to achieve fast open communication requires more effort from employees. It is hard for managers to control the information flow, wireless communication tools, recognizing hyper-competition demands, and how to avoid and adapt to external changes. (Lahiri at. en, 2008)

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to get a deeper view of internal collaboration within a company and as mentioned above we will be studying and researching Ramböll. With the observations that we will be making from Ramböll we will have the chance to get a broader vision on the subject of if knowledge sharing can indirectly foster a more learning and innovative working climate. The opportunity of having access to and studying a global engineering company will give us the knowledge and assistance in the area of knowledge management, sharing knowledge and open communication.

1.5 Scientific Question

Can a wiki tool for internal communication be an enabler for a more open and knowledge working climate? And can this indirectly foster a more learning and innovative organization?

1.6 Background of the Project

As mention above we choose to contact a global company, Ramböll which have already started to work in our subject area; knowledge management, knowledge sharing, open communication, internal collaboration and the implementation of wikis. Through this thesis our main focus will be on Ramböll.

(13)

Introduction

Ramböll is an innovative global company that is working in an open forum, wikis, and an open communication tool, to share information to strengthen the internal collaboration. In a company with more than 8000 employees it is of huge importance to work hard on the internal power to make use of all the competence and knowledge within the company. Ramböll has a market that covers almost every continent and by sharing knowledge they would also need to embrace their information so that Ramböll would have the possibility to gain better innovation. There will automatically be a huge demand of effort from managers and employees for a company to change their overall work behavior and to share knowledge with a new tool. (Seybold, 2006)

Wikis is still in the beginning phase of its establishment in companies but it is believed that wikis will follow the hyper cycle below.

Figure 1.1Hype Cycle Source: Gartner (1995)

With several companies starting to use wikis, it has made wikis develop a hype cycle. Wikis is currently moving along the first phase. This phase is the technology trigger or breakthrough. Wikis has recently been launched and is in the progress of generating significant press and interest. The next phases that wikis will hope to proceed into on the hype curve are the peak of inflated expectations, trough of disillusionment, slope of enlightenment, and the last phase being the plateau of productivity. This is the point where wikis has hopefully become increasingly stable and will evolve into second and third generations.

(14)

Ramböll is working with a high level of open communication and has a strong intention to break through old strategies and habits. The wikis process will take time and patience but hopefully soon will be a strong communication tool in the company.

Internal collaboration and open communication are not new strategies but sharing information on open forums, wikis, is part of the new learning and innovative organization. It is also an important element of knowledge management and can be a key success if it is practiced in the correct manner. This is the reason why we have decided to start writing about this subject and to see if it is possible for companies to be successful working with the open communication strategy and wikis. We want to combine sharing knowledge and internal collaboration to see if companies could foster a more learning and innovative organization. We will be looking for advantages and disadvantages in respect to this combination. It was important for us to decide to write about a topic that was up-to-date and that we believe will be tomorrow’s issue. Also, we wanted to write about a topic that would be beneficial to companies.

1.7 Our Background

We are two students that are currently studying in the masters program: leadership and management in international context at the University of Kalmar. We are both feeling confident that we will have the right interpretive approach that is needed and will be using the qualitative research method to gain a deeper view into our study. Our approach of knowledge and reality is uncertain however, we will try our best to reach a clear conclusion and final standpoint. By using theories and models, while working with an induction method approach and a proofing way of scientific technique we will be able to reach a conclusion.

An important fact for us to point out is that knowledge management and wikis can be combined in a way which may lead to a more open working climate. In our study we are going to focus on both the positive and negative effects of open communication and collaboration on open forums, such as wikis. When starting our research we will try to have a critical and neutral view of the research object, subject and existing situations.

The subject of knowledge management that is connected with open communication is a topic that we both feel affectionate about and we know that our enthusiasm may prevent us to be critical and neutral in every situation. However, our awareness will be included in the conclusion and throughout our entire work. We do not see our excitement for the subject as a barrier because we have a steady theoretical ground and wide methodology knowledge that will make us have a neutral standpoint during our research journey. Knowledge management and collaboration has been major

(15)

Introduction

subjects in our education this year and our challenge is to see if there is a link between the two subjects.

1.8 Limitation

The limitations of our research will be that we do not look at how employees are being innovative or the process of being innovative in organizations. We will not be doing research on how managers are leading their organization in becoming a leader in their industry but what companies need to do to be able to share information to gain the power of internal collaboration. The fast changing environment is a sub-track to our thesis which we will not enter but instead will explore how companies are reacting to sharing knowledge internally. An interesting subject that we will not get into is the change of management style and behavior but we will maintain in the area of the managers way of working with implementation and knowledge management. Also, we will not be explaining the reasons or demands of the consumers, products, or services of the different companies in Ramböll or their industry.

1.9 Structure of the Thesis

After this brief introduction we will start with the methodology part because it is of huge importance for our thesis. In the methodology chapter we will explain what methods we used and how we collected our data to get our results and conclusion. Chapter three is our theoretical framework where we give the reader the base of our subject and to gain some knowledge about what we are researching. We continue with a Ramböll case which we have created from the data that they have provided us with. The case gives the reader a clearer view of why our subject is relevant and important for global companies. Furthermore, we analyze the result of the outcome from our methods and discuss it together with our own opinion, in chapter six and seven, respectively. Finally, we end the thesis with a conclusion of our work and suggest future research topics which we came across during our research.

(16)

2. Methodology

In this chapter we will explain the method that we used and how it led us to our conclusion. We will write about how and why we chose this approach and discuss its trustworthiness.

2.1 Our Role as Researcher’s

According to Collin Fisher (2007) the role that we used is a non-involved harmless academic judge because we studied the Ramböll Company with only access to interviews, observations, and the possibility to do research about the company. We did two personal face-to-face interviews and one interview via email. Our questions were influenced by our academic background and experience from earlier projects.

2.2 Research Approach

We used a qualitative research approach in our research because it gave us depth in our study. The approach allowed us to talk with Ramböll managers and to have conversations and dialogues with employees working with communication, sharing knowledge, and wikis. Through the qualitative research approach we hunted down employees to get their point of view about what the present situation is with working in a company that works with knowledge management and sharing knowledge to improve the internal collaboration. By working with interviews, dialogues and conversations we were able to get a wide perspective of how manager’s work with internal collaboration and how they share information within the company.

We suggested that the qualitative research was the best choice for our study because the purpose of our thesis was to discover if a wiki tool can be an enabler for a more open communication that may lead to a more learning and innovative organization. While using a qualitative approach when we attacked our scientific questions we thought that we could get a better insight and a clearer picture of Ramböll’s internal collaboration.

Our methodological stance was an interpretive approach with a subjective point of view in order to collect data based on observations that we made. We reflected on the material we gathered and then translated it into our interpretative approach. The link between understanding and accomplishment is indirect because the real world is complex and our options were not always obvious.

(Fisher, 2007)

According to Holme & Solvang (1991) the primary purpose of a qualitative research approach is to fulfill an understandable purpose and not try to find validity within the gathered data. What was

(17)

Methodology

important was to get deep into the study and not try to solve any world problems. The use of the qualitative research approach guaranteed that we got close to the source and gave us a clear view of the research area. We got the opportunity to directly observe and the possibility to analyze the source from a closer point of view. This opportunity for reflection and interpretation is much larger compared to any other research approach. (Fisher, 2007)

There was a huge amount of skepticism when using the qualitative research compared to the quantitative research approach. The quantitative approach would have given us a result that included diagrams and numbers. However, our choice of research approach was based on the belief of open communication as an enabler of the power of innovation in global companies. The choice of method gave us a chance to look deeper into the study which was an obvious choice when looking at effects and changes in a company.

What was important for us when we did the research was to take care of the opportunity of objectively observing and analyzing the interviews. This gave us the possibility to reflect on the material that we gathered during the process.

2.3 Qualitative Research

The qualitative research that we performed gave us the experience of participating and enabling us to get a deeper view of how the internal collaboration worked in a global company, such as Ramböll. Our scientific questions were built in a way that forces us to answer them through qualitative research and that was the main reason why we chose to have interviews (personal and via email). With the interviews we were able to have conversations and dialogues. The qualitative research approach also gave us the possibility to observe the surrounding behavior of the interviewee, which we thought would be important when we reflected over the result of the study. (Fisher, 2007)

Qualitative research allowed us to connect with people at a human level and to learn more about what really happens inside Ramböll. We had the opportunity to be in contact with the people of Ramböll throughout our entire thesis process. In the early phases of our thesis we knew that the questions that were intended for the company were to be open-ended. The way that we structured the interviews was so we got the opportunity to have a conversation with the interviewee. We had different topics and themes that we wanted to discuss because we did not want to simply sit there and just ask the interviewee questions. The themes or topics that we had were knowledge management, sharing knowledge, internal collaboration and implementation of wikis. We had some follow up questions on the topics in case our interviewee got stuck or they did not have much to say about the topics. We also came into the interview with a clear and established purpose.

(18)

The quality of our research approach was the only way for us to get access to the information that we were looking for. The research gave us the possibility to have a complex relationship towards Ramböll and also the ability to work on the field together with experts of our topic. (Corbin & Strauss, 2008)

The methods that we chose gave us the option of being subjective and open for the results and outcomes of our field study. Throughout our study we analyzed our interpretive material and had an open mind towards the abstraction that the qualitative method resulted. We took some time after the field study which allowed us to consider the different assumptions and interpretation that we could make regarding the collected data.

Even though we had a huge interest in our topic we presented the data fairly and tried to put ourselves in the role of an interpretive researcher with closeness to the research material. The qualitative research approach gave us the chance to analyze our data by asking questions and making comparisons between theory and reality by observing real life situations in the office of Ramböll. Our choice was primarily based on the opportunity of interviewing employees in a growing and leading company, and to gain a deeper view of knowledge sharing and wikis. During the interviews that we consulted in the head office of Ramböll in Göteborg we used an mp3-recorder to record all the data so we had the ability to listen to the information again to reflect over what the interviewee said. During the interviews we improvised and changed all the personal interviews to Swedish from English, when we realized that the answers and responses would be in more detail. The interviewee was more relaxed when they spoke their native tongue so all the interviews were performed in Swedish.

2.3.1 Research Area

The areas that we explored using the qualitative research approach were sharing knowledge to strengthen internal collaboration and Ramböll’s present situation. It was also to study the process of wikis being implemented, both in the work place and in the mind of employees at Ramböll. Another important area which was influenced from the areas that we mentioned above was the importance of sharing knowledge that may get a company to reach one step further and be more innovative. We had the focus on how Ramböll is implementing a new tool, in this case wikis to find knowledge within people that have yet been explored. This became an important main track for the rest of our questions because everything, in one way or another was connected to the implementation of a new tool to remove any mind barriers that employee’s could have with sharing knowledge with others. A

(19)

Methodology

hot topic for Ramböll and for other global companies is how to encourage people to find other individuals expertise and special knowledge to create an advantage on working together with co-workers. These are the areas and themes that we had prepared before we performed the interviews and dialogues at Ramböll. Our focus was mainly to get these topics or phrases answered and commented on in order to have the chance to reach a satisfying result for our scientific questions.

2.3.2 Data Collection

The complementary information that we collected came from public documents and Ramböll’s web-pages. The company offered us material so we could have a clear picture of the company and their situation.

We divided the primary exploratory data collection into two groups; the first group would be the personal interviews, conversations, and dialogues and the second group would include interviews over the Internet. The secondary data collection was the observations that we made during the personal interviews and dialogues. In both situations and through the entire research process we used open-ended questions and sometimes just as a subject as an introduction to get the conversation started. The outcome of all the interviews, dialogues, emails, and conversations was trustworthy within the area of each employee’s expertise and special knowledge.

2.4 Preparation

The first thing we did was that we contacted Ramböll and asked if we could do our research using their company. Ramböll immediately had great cooperation and gave us access to information and the possibility for us to make our qualitative research study with their employees. When we worked with our contact Dan Engström, we created the scientific questions which were within the framework of knowledge management and knowledge sharing over wikis.

When we entered the thesis process we decided to start brainstorming questions within the topic which we could use for the interviews. In an early stage we realized that the qualitative research approach was perfect for our study and would lead us to the best result. At the same time we started to create open-ended questions and themes that we wanted to explore and throughout the theory writing process we edited, added and deleted questions so that the final questions would fulfill a successful outcome.

During the theory writing we contacted Mr. Engström and he gave us the contact information to all the employees that he thought would be of interest for our research. After we contacted all of them,

(20)

two of the employees wanted to perform the interview at their office in Göteborg and for one employee it was more convenient to have the interview via email, and they are located in London. Our main Ramböll contact was Mr. Engström, who is the Openness Task Force Coordinator in the Group of Openness. He has helped us from the beginning and introduced us to Patrik Lidgren, Structural Engineer at Ramböll Sverige AB. We performed the two personal interviews at their office in Göteborg, Sweden. Another important individual during our research was Isao Matsumoto, Business Analyst at Ramböll in Whitbybird, London, England.

The contact that we had in London received five main questions, the question were related to what he was doing in Ramböll. He gave us the possibility of having a partnership through our entire thesis process and helped us with questions that occurred and shared his experience and knowledge with us. We had regular contact with him who benefited the quality of our result and conclusion.

We purposely scheduled the interviews with Mr. Engström and Mr. Lidgren in their own offices in order for them to be in a comfortable and safe environment. While performing interviews using a qualitative approach it was hard for the moderator to predict everything that could happen during the process, independent on how prepared the moderator is because there could be random things and situations that can appear. We were as prepared as possible and had questions for the interviewee but had no idea if their personality and environment would affect the outcome of the research.

The researcher objects such as managers and employees at Ramböll all have special knowledge and experience within the different areas that we were doing research about. Everyone that is working in the company today has a clear insight in the organization and is part of the opening up approach and implementation of wikis. They all have a deep knowledge in the innovation area and are updated through working with new technology. An employee that is not a part of the new processes of opening up to the environment, working with openness, and working with wikis were not a part of our research study. By only including the people with this pre-knowledge, expertise, and occupations in Ramböll, the level of the research was better and more compacted.

2.5 Implementation

The first interview that we had was with Dan Engström. It began with an open discussion about open communication and knowledge sharing online. It was a two-way dialogue that led him into a presentation of Ramböll’s internal wikis. Mr. Engström showed us how wikis is being used by employees and in what situations it is helpful for the company. After the detailed and great

(21)

Methodology

demonstration of Ramböll’s wiki pages we started to record the conversation about openness, knowledge management and the work with wikis in Ramböll. The atmosphere was open and relaxed and lasted for almost three hours.

The second part of the research included more specific questions within the areas mentioned above to clarify both the positive and negative approach of how Ramböll works with the different areas.

2.6 Research Quality

2.6.1 What makes Qualitative Research Trustworthy?

With the help from our theory portion we have analyzed the data that we gathered throughout the interviews, observations and dialogues. In order to gain the credibility we choose to contact people with special knowledge within the certain areas that we have investigated. The result of the interview included both expected and unexpected outcomes and we added both of these to our study. We have presented all the data, both positive and negative and we believe that anyone else could implement our research again and get similar results.

We avoided using technical language so our result would not be misunderstood and that the outcome of our study stayed clear. We also avoided any errors and/ or misunderstandings to reach a higher level of trustworthiness.

2.6.2 Awareness

This study was done with the purpose to examine how Ramböll works with open communication and their ability of implementing a new tool, wikis, to make it possible to collaborate and share knowledge internally. It is essential that our theory is at a high level and in the same level as the purpose of the study. The result must be valid and in the same line as the purpose for the scientific research approach. A difficulty with qualitative research is proving that what the research object says is the same as what he does. (Corbin & Strauss, 2008)

When we decided to use a qualitative research approach on the highly educated employees in Ramböll that have special knowledge, our expectation was to get a deep and honest picture internal collaboration. We also had in mind that the interviewee would want to feel as confident as possible in the interview situation so we could get all of their knowledge within the area of our research questions. We hoped by having open ended type questions would help them open up and speak freely and easily.

(22)

We thought that the surroundings could give a negative effect on the interviewee. However, in our case we did all the research at their home offices so we could eliminate them feeling uncomfortable or lost. It was up to us to decide if the statements would be credible and we thought that the credibility would be high because of their high level of knowledge within the areas.

The interviewees felt confident giving their responses so we have no reason to believe that the answers were incorrect. We thought the answers that we received were all logical, reasonable, and clear. During all the personal interviews the climate was open and unforced. Every research object shared their knowledge, thoughts and expertise which gave us a wide and deep insight on their viewpoint.

2.6.3 Criticism of Sources

The material gains credibility with our choice of using a company that works daily with this type of environment since our study was about how a company may strengthen their internal collaboration with help from a tool, wikis, to foster a more learning and innovative organization. Mr. Engström (2009) handles all the coordination with the group of individuals that works to implement openness and wikis into Ramböll. Mr. Lidgren (2009) works in another department where people have a more traditional work habit which gave us a varied insight in the company.

The email interview we completed was a branch that was located outside of Sweden which gave us a picture of a different culture and a wider picture of the problems with implementation. It also gave us different viewpoints of innovation and openness. The interview with Isao Matsumoto, from Ramböll (UK) gave us a stronger complement of observations and interpretation to back up our material. Email interviews could be criticized because the interview object had time to come up with the “correct” answer and it was not possible to observe the participants reactions. Since the interview was completed through emails the possibility for further questions disappeared.

(23)

Theoretical Framework

3. Theoretical Framework

This chapter includes a brief theoretical summery about our subject. Each part starts with a conceptual framework to orient the reader through the content.

3.1 Conceptual Framework

At the beginning of each part of the theoretical framework there will be a model to help the reader to orient where they are in the theoretical framework chapter.

3.2 Knowledge Management

There are four different areas within knowledge management. Those four areas are capturing information, generating ideas, storing information and distributing information. When companies focus on capturing information it is a need for ensuring that they not suddenly lose vital information when an important individual moves to another employer. There has to be a process within the company that keeps information flowing so that when employees come and go the company still has the information that that employee had. So the company could train and prepare the next person that is going to take over that position. The second area is generating ideas. With this the company should focus on encouraging all employees to come up with new ideas. The company could use a reward system for employees that come up with ideas that make or save money for the company. (Economist, 2009)

The third area is to store information. The ability to store information will help with the first component of capturing information. The company should have a data warehouse, which could be a wiki, which is structured so that any one that needs information can turn to the warehouse and access it at any time whenever they need to use it. The last area is to distribute information and relies on all three other components to be successful. Once the information is captured and stored properly companies need to encourage the spread of information to others, the internal collaboration. Companies need to make sure that their employees are putting information in the data warehouse, even though that hoarding information has historically been seen as a source of power.

Knowledge Management Sharing Knowledge Open Communication Internal Collaboration Implementaion

(24)

The employees have to get passed this and share all their information within the entire company. (ibid)

However, having great success with knowledge management and to store data into a warehouse only goes so far. As Pugh & Dixon (2008) mention, there are way too many circumstances where companies are just capturing knowledge, tossing into some file and then it is forgotten. The two authors suggest that a good way to make sure knowledge will benefit the employees who need it, are to engage them in a knowledge harvest. This is defined as a systematic, facilitated gathering and circulation of knowledge. The key is that when someone in the company has some knowledge that can identify who could use the knowledge, or who the knowledge seekers are. If this is done properly leads to the information will get to the right employee and not just stored away and be forgotten. The knowledge management will actually be beneficial. (Pugh & Dixon, 2008)

Knowledge and information are the most valuable commodities in the new economy. The popularity of the new information and communication technologies are used as great tools for powerful learning and knowledge sharing systems. The maximization of knowledge and information facilitates good business production, use, and dissemination. Also, at the same time companies have to remember that this makes it difficult to be able to keep regulation and control over their knowledge and information. (ibid)

3.3 Sharing Knowledge

The new technological innovation affects globalization and vice versa. However, they interact in a very flexible way. This interaction involves employees that take part in the company’s knowledge sharing process in order to create new values within the business. When employees are working with the knowledge sharing process they will be working in new areas or in many cases with new technology such as wikis to receive the sharing of knowledge from other co-workers. Wikis may be the field that business strengths rely on to get through the process of sharing knowledge, so they get the internal collaboration that is needed to reach a common goal between co-workers. Another strength that is needed is a manager that is able to highlight motivators from their employees. The motivators will help the managers get other employees to gain the motivation and passion for

Knowledge Managemen t Sharing Knowledge Open Communication Internal Collaboration Implementaion

(25)

Theoretical Framework

working with new technology, and to be able to understand that sharing authorship of the final project with others is not a problem. (Seybold, 2006)

Once the motivator’s and managers have gotten the encouragement from the other co-workers it allows them to contribute all of the employee’s intellectual property. Looking back to what was mentioned in the above paragraph, working with wikis the process would start out with an idea and when employees are sharing knowledge with their co-workers they could build on what another has already created, so the final product would have many creators. (ibid)

3.3.1 Knowledge sharing cycle

According to Kolb and Wishaw (2005), sharing knowledge on wikis must be applied on the learning cycle that he bases from structured activities which will create common experiences within a team or department of an organization. The learning cycle has four steps; doing, reflecting, understanding and applying. These are applicable in (McPherson & Bapyista Nunes, 2004) sharing information, giving and receiving feedback, planning, competing, and collaborating.

In the knowledge cycle an employee reuses existing knowledge to create new knowledge which may gain a more innovative and learning company. In the aspect of a team that shares their existing knowledge, the knowledge cycle is used to create a new powerful tool for reaching innovation. The knowledge cycle opportunity of integration in the team is created from the experiential learning cycle. Kolb and Wishaw (2005) model can be extended into a five phase model which is important for the learning process if a business wants to implement a new strategy or tool. The model (McPherson & Bapyista Nunes, 2004) includes; experience, publishing, processing, generalizing and, applying. The use of the five-phase model will connect the user in practice based learning activities which is exposed and validated through social negotiation.

Here is a brief summary of the five-phase model by McPherson & Bapyista Nunes (2004) and shown in the figure below. The model starts out with experience and the user takes part of the activity. The second phase is publishing, which is where the user collaborates and shares information. The third phase is processing where the user discusses with the opposite partner and a dynamic occurs. The user’s activities extrapolate the knowledge from the learning setting to its environment which is the generalizing step or forth step in the model (on the next page). The final phase is applying, which the user learns real concepts in which they will create new innovative ideas by the user’s existing knowledge, and experiences. The collaboration and concepts are then used on

(26)

wikis between employees in the company. The outcome of the five-phase learning model will be an active and designed result for employees to learn by doing. (McPherson & Bapyista Nunes, 2004)

Figure 3.1Five-Phase Model Source: McPherson & Nunes (2004)

3.3.2 Information

Currently, businesses are in the middle of a technological-information revolution that leads them into a complex process of innovation. (Bhidé, 2008)

When talking about sharing knowledge it is important to mention information because in many cases information is the key of knowing what to share. Information is a part of the knowledge that employees receives. The production of information is still very costly to produce but nowadays very cheap to reproduce. Companies suffer from high fixed cost and a very low marginal cost after the information is produced. If businesses were to use the Internet as an information sharing tool the cost of information flow may reduce within a business. However, there is a big risk that occurs with using the Internet to share information and that is for the businesses to be able to manage what information is being exchanged. The online cost of spreading information is non-existing but because of the current free-sharing era the respect for information has disappeared. Also, the barrier is fading of what to share and how much to put up on the web. Today this way of thinking is disappearing and businesses are much bolder on sharing information. (Shapiro & Varian, 1999)

Experience

Publishing

2ndProcessing

Generalizing Applying

1stPhase- User takes

part of an activity.

5thPhase- user learns

real concepts that creates new innovative

ideas

3rd Phase- user

discusses with opposite partner and dynamic

occurs.

2ndPhase- user

collaborates and shares information with second

partner

4thPhase- user’s

activities extrapolate knowledge

(27)

Theoretical Framework 3.3.3 The Risk of Sharing Information

The available and inexpensive flow of information through the Internet forces businesses to live in a society that is overloaded with a lot of information. The value of information has decreased even further because of the legal rights of certain information that does not let businesses have complete power to manage the information. This has been a larger problem for businesses as well as the information flow that the internet and wikis allows. (Shapiro & Varian, 1999)

Technology has not only transformed the speed of which information can be shared but has also forced businesses to upgrade their work processes and systems. This demands a rethinking of the strategic fundamentals that businesses are based on (Dainty & Anderson, 2000). All the information that is put out on the web or wikis may be copied and transmitted around the world in less than a second. The backside of the golden Internet coin is that the web is one giant out-of-control copying, spreading machine. (Shapiro & Varian, 1999)

3.4 Open Communication

The new models, systems, tools, and other ways of communication are helping with the speed of open communication. One of the main reasons why there has been a change in speed of open communication is because of the dramatic changes in what the web can offer businesses. However, these opportunities for open communication opportunities and knowledge sharing may not always help companies in a positive manner. There are some challenges that could occur. One of these challenges of using knowledge sharing combined with open communication is being able to manage the information flow to benefit the internal collaboration. Another challenge would be from what the web-based environment commands and that is to get an attitude change that is required from both the manager’s work and the mindset of the employees who are involved to work towards a more learning and innovative working climate. (McPherson & Bapyista Nunes, 2004)

Chesbrough (2003a) explains that companies need to change toward a more open communicative logic that is different from their old logic. The new logic that companies need to use is to leverage the distributed landscape of knowledge. In other words, companies can no longer just keep their

Knowledge Managemen t Open Communication Internal Collaboration Implementaion & Attitude Wikis Sharing Knowledge

(28)

technologies and wait for their own business to make use of them. The new logic will let companies take advantage of the circulation of knowledge, rather than not paying attention to it.

Companies need to break away from what they are used to doing to make money and instead make money by taking multiple paths to market their technology. Also, companies need to stop the exclusion of not letting anyone else from using the technology and keep up with the environmental change in the technology area. It is important for companies to adapt the new to start managing intellectual property to advance their own business model. (Chesbrough, 2003a)

The strategy of open communication has been born with the use of new technology to communicate faster. The new strategy may lead to a more open and innovative working climate in companies. The open communication strategy does not exist without Internet. Open communication is a process of sharing ideas to gain innovation and can be an enabler for sharing information between individual’s. A need of open communication is demanded in today’s companies and the business world to strengthen the core collaboration. (ibid)

When it comes to open communication, and for companies to change their work strategy to reach more open and free communication, employees have to change their mindset of collaborate with each other. The main mindset principle differences between what open communication is versus the principles of keeping knowledge and information to your self. For companies to stop employees to keep knowledge and expertise for themselves they will have to focus on the internal collaboration. (Chesbrough, 2003)

3.5 Internal Collaboration

Internal collaboration is often to gain a more open working climate for sharing knowledge. Good and strong relations in companies can itself be a potent source of competitive advantage. (De Wit & Meyer, 2004)

The collaboration process must give results so that employees know that it is beneficial to continue to sharing knowledge. Connecting employees with similar issue can be done if the company has a strong internal collaboration with a structured internal network. The internal collaboration can be

Knowledge Managemen t Internal Collaboration Implementaion

& Attitude Wikis Sharing

Knowledge

Open Communication

(29)

Theoretical Framework

beneficial for companies if employees have an easy access to their co-workers, and it could also strengthen the inner collaboration. Connecting employees in order to sharing knowledge and work on projects through fast communication tools will encourage employees to continue working together and the mind barrier that employees could have mind will hopefully fade away. With everything going as planned, the collaboration and open communication may benefit and further the innovation in a company. (Seybold, 2006)

The process of internal collaboration is meant to close the gap between vision and reality. Companies should use collaboration to gain knowledge and use the wikis as a tool to have a more open communication. If the engine keeps accelerating through the process of open communication the business may automatically generate organic power. (ibid)

3.5.1 Shared Authorship

Another phenomenon that arises when sharing knowledge and collaborating is the ability of shared authorship. The sharing of the outcome with others is unnatural for individuals. (Woods & Thoeny, 2007) The genuine feeling of shared authorship of a final product is new and terrifying for employees both in the work place and privately. The barrier of sharing knowledge exists in people’s minds and it has been known that reflecting, writing, and working should be done individually or in small groups inside the company. (Shapiro & Varian, 1999)

When a company starts working with wikis there is a hope that the barrier in the mind of employees fades away. The individualism work behavior can turn into a feeling of collective pride if they are a part of creating something that is much larger than what one person could do alone. (Woods & Thoeny, 2007)

3.6 Implementation & Attitude

3.6.1 Implementation

According to Ohmae (2004), there are three major factors which a business needs to be sensitive about before starting the process of implementing a new business strategy. Ohmae (2004) calls the factors the essential R’s: ripeness, reality and resources. The first, ripeness, is about timing, which in many times are more about luck than stillness, the second factor, reality, demands the business to be

Knowledge Managemen t Internal Collaboration Implementaion

& Attitude Wikis Sharing

Knowledge

Open Communication

(30)

aware of their surroundings or the awareness of the business core competence. The last one, resources, means exactly what it says, but unfortunately it is ignored by companies when working with an implementation process.

As soon as the process of implementation starts it is important that there is a responsible person surrounding the employees that has the right knowledge, encouragement, and can offer the right tool kit to work with the process in a correct manner. The management needs to involve the employees that have concerns by surrounding them with managers that have the right knowledge and competence to get their concerns taken care of. (Seybold, 2006)

Management needs to encourage employees to change their work behavior when trying to implement a more open communication and knowledge sharing climate. If a person identifies an issue in the new situation they will naturally try their own way to penetrate the problem using their pre-knowledge and experience from similar situations. At the same time employees need to use their pre-knowledge with whom they are working with to solve the problem together (De Wit & Meyer, 2004). The beginning of implementing wikis to the office and the mind of employees is for managers to plant a seed of curiosity. Therefore, implementation cannot be taught but can be learned and encouraged by managers. (ibid)

3.6.2 Attitude- Learning by Doing

Learning by doing (Kolb, 1971) is one of two different approaches to implement a new tool into the work and minds of employees. This learning strategy encourages employees to try new solutions, behaviors and, cognitive responses. The effect appears when a person connects with an activity, criticizes it, looks back at it and puts some useful insight into action.

(McPherson & Bapyista Nunes, 2004)

3.6.3 Make Sense to Change

A manager needs to show their employees the reason for changing work behavior and adapting to a new tool. For anyone to change their daily working behavior, the new behavior must make sense for the users to change. Another factor that will play a big role in the users mind is that the new action needs to benefit the employees. A manager that works with a group of employees that has started an implementation process, such as implementing the wikis-tool, needs to implement the tool step by step, and not force the employees to use it. (Seybold, 2006)

(31)

Theoretical Framework 3.6.4 In The Mind of the Employees

Karl E. Weick (2001) established sensemaking in the creation of meaning and believed that knowledge and problem solving is an individual act. However, interpretation of the cognitive perspective is the opposite. The cognitive perspective is a social process that is shared with others and becomes a social product. Knowledge is also a social product that humans produce with others and share to try to reach a further point than what could have done alone.

It is natural for humans to try to understand what is happening around them. When individuals direct their attention to something they start the process of making sense out of it by using their pre-knowledge, references, or frame of references. The process of understanding something in the surroundings is by using the frames of references and it will construct a meaning to the stimuli by giving the person a broader experience. Also, it will magnify the frame of references by making sense both individually and socially. Managers need to tale this in account when working on the implementation process. In this phase, a business has the possibility to implement a new tool into the minds of the employees. Changing an employee’s thought and behavior is not something that can happen over-night. (Weick, 2001)

The process takes time and during the implementation the involved parties needs support from a good leader. (Seybold, 2006)

An employee’s mindset helps shape the way of approaching problems. The mindset helps what people pay attention to, what to ignore, and finally helps to reach a conclusion. It is a product of how people are viewing the world, assumptions, past experience, beliefs, and values. The employee’s mindset is also like a filter that all information and impressions pass through and it could filter which produces knowledge for future interpretations and problem solving. A complication for success managers is that it may lead them to be over-confidence. The extra confidence might lead to burning the wings for the future success for the company. Manager’s also needs to keep an eye out of the teams strengths and weaknesses and still be aware of their own lack of knowledge or experience to be able to confront upcoming problems which can be a negative effect of the implementation. (Dainty & Anderson, 2000)

Managers are making choices by using their values and beliefs as guidelines and their experiences will guide the manager’s actions and decision throughout the implementation process. The basic belief within a business is formed by the organizations culture and that belief will affect what decisions the manager makes and how it is interpreted by the employees. The employee beliefs will be where they get their motivation for the effort that they put into changing their work behavior.

(32)

This is the glue that creates the organizational culture. Also, the understanding of the shared values within the business may be the reason for the success or failure in implementing a new technology. (Dainty & Anderson, 2000)

3.6.5 Management Approach

Managers need to show their employees through action how to learn using a new tool for sharing information. The managerial work is becoming more complex, abstract and subjective because of the fast information technology. In the mind of managers, the understanding for the new fast technology is part of today’s working environment and may cost more confusion than help. The demand for managers requires primarily cerebral rather than manual skills. (Dainty & Anderson, 2000) If a manager has been working with wikis over the last couple years in a business and then decides to quit the company, the information and knowledge of that person could be found on the company’s wiki pages.

A manager could face the problem of having a disconnection between their employees and new technology because there could be an accelerated advancement of new technology that individuals cannot keep up with. Also, the disconnection could be because of the limitation of knowledge and capacity from employees in the departments that are not as developed in new technology, as other employees. This is not something that a manager can force onto the employees instead the manager needs to develop and prepare the relationship between employees and the new incoming technology. The need to get a better understanding of how to implement new technology into employee’s minds can lead to an overall mental approach were problems are analyzed and dealt with, instead of managers just delivering information into the office with the belief that employees are just going to adapt to the new technology into their daily work routine. (Dainty & Anderson, 2000)

3.6.6 Manager’s Expand the Mind for New Technology

With the fast technology developments there is a need to interact on a physical and mental level. In recent times, businesses worked more in a team-based level within the organization. Now, with new technology makes the workforce strategy more of an open forum level, which is global and innovative. An important factor when entering the global playground is that human beings are still in need of interacting beyond a mere information flow. The technology will not replace the need for the interaction that has already been established in people’s mindset. As Mintzberg mentioned in the early seventies, the interaction process of managers that observe the information that they are exposed too and the key factors for adapting to new technology are through social processes and interpersonal contacts. The reason why this is still an important factor for managers is that people will always follow the manager’s good behavior. (Dainty & Anderson, 2000)

References

Related documents

Camera Definition: Close-up shot, High-angle shot, Panning (depth and width) Space Definition: Narrow Space?. Composition Type:

- Anonymous office-based employee It became evident during the focus groups with the office-based personnel that cognitive needs, which regard searching for understanding,

The analysis of the empirical data indicates that there are gaps between what the internal customer thinks or believes that the purchasing department does and what the purchasing

• Automation: Using appropriate tools to automate tasks such as source code integration, testing, software delivery and deployment, as well as to keep track of changes to

The aim of these research questions was to answer how and why internal quality audits are conducted, what factors that are important for effective audits and how internal quality

The purpose of the thesis is to investigate the relationship between internal communication and its components (Leadership, information & knowledge sharing,

The 8 identified communication dynamics that were used throughout the rest of this research are: working together within a diverse staff team, giving and

Detta steg kommer att fortgå under hela tiden som projektet pågår och dokumenterar projektet. 2.7