Knowledge transfer

In their study, Von Krogh et al. (2001, pp. 424) distinguish two core knowledge processes: knowledge creation and knowledge transfer. The newly created, documented knowledge should be provided to others in the organization so that the learning process can begin. Knowledge transfer requires that parties are aware of the opportunity to exchange the knowledge, and that they are motivated to apply the exchanged knowledge into their own activities to realize the benefits (Von Krogh et al.

2001, pp. 425). Therefore, the organization should encourage the knowledge sharing culture and arrange possibilities for workers to create shared learning experiences (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Carpenter &

Rudge 2003; Dalkir 2005). Employees are often reluctant to share infor-mation because they are commonly rewarded for what they know. There-fore, it is important for organizations to have a reward system for knowledge sharing (Herschel & Jones 2005, pp. 52).

Knowledge can flow through different channels inside the organization.

Informal channels, like unscheduled meetings, seminars or plain conver-sations, work in small organizations where the smaller amount of interme-diaries cannot interfere with the knowledge passing on from one worker to another. Formal channels, such as training sessions, will offer a greater distribution of knowledge inside the organization, and it is also suitable for larger organizations. If the knowledge to be transferred is very context

specific, then personal channels (e.g. apprenticeships, personnel trans-fers) are the best option, whereas impersonal channels, like knowledge repositories, work effectively for codified, non-context specific knowledge.

The most effective transfer channel depends upon the type of knowledge to be transferred, and in many cases using multiple channels brings the best results. (Alavi & Leidner 2001, pp. 120-121)

Knowledge transfer should not be limited just inside the organization as external partners are also important. Organizations can benefit from hav-ing strategic partnerships with other companies. Also, research and train-ing agreements with universities and other research institutions offer the most up-to-date research knowledge for the firm. A good example of trans-ferring knowledge from outside the organization is using a CRM system (see chapter 2.1.4). The knowledge can flow into different directions and thus benefit both parties. Bose and Sugumaran (2003, pp. 5) note that by integrating CRM data with knowledge from around the organization, com-panies can make truly customer-centric business decisions. (Von Krogh et al. 2001, pp. 425-426)

IT systems play an important role in leveraging knowledge across domains in an organization as they provide a link between sources of knowledge (Alavi & Leidner 2001). The systems help employees to design, organize and develop their own work activities and also to communicate knowledge with each other (Von Krogh et al. 2001, pp. 429). IT increases the knowledge transfer by offering a domain that is free from time and location restraints, so that the knowledge seekers can access the needed infor-mation whenever they want. Alavi and Leidner (2001) listed some applica-tions that suit for knowledge transfer. They state that electronic bulletin boards, discussion forums, and knowledge directories facilitate sharing of knowledge as employees from different subsidiaries can discuss with each other about their problems without having to be in the same space. Fur-thermore, other employees can follow the discussion and learn about it without having to take part in it.

3.3 Integrating Knowledge Management and Business Intelligence

Recently, the academic literature has started to propose the integration of BI and KM to promote organizational learning and effective decision-making (Wang & Wang 2008; Herschel & Jones 2005; Seeley & Daven-port 2006). The convergence of KM and BI can deepen and broaden the amount of searchable knowledge and information because the integration process usually turns unstructured information from individual heads into structured intelligence which can then be accessed with traditional busi-ness tools (Herschel & Jones 2005, pp. 48). The integration of these two concepts has previously faced technical difficulties as most BI software systems were unable to integrate non-quantitative data into their data warehouses. The evolving technologies have solved these problems, and now the data can be reported from a variety of previously incompatible sources, which enables the rapprochement of KM and BI (Herschel &

Jones 2005, pp. 47).

Even though Herschel and Jones (2005) argued that the vast majority of firms’ knowledge exists in the minds of its employees, some firms attempt to collect the knowledge into a reusable form. But often the large number of findings from extensive data analysis is used only ad hoc as firms have no proper structure or process for capturing and reusing the knowledge over time (Seeley & Davenport 2006, pp. 11). Nemati et al. (2002) sug-gest that besides the data warehouse model that BI systems use, firms should have a knowledge warehouse architecture which facilitates the capturing and coding of knowledge, and thus enhances the knowledge retrieval and sharing. Seeley and Davenport (2006, pp. 11) argue that the underlying technologies that analyze the BI content and the KM content can be different but the front-end technology for accessing and displaying the content should be the same. They root for the usage of portals (e.g.

dashboards) that can display data, data-derived knowledge, or human-derived knowledge at the same time. The case study conducted by Seeley and Davenport (2006) presented some companies that had integrated

var-ious business domains, such as CRM, quality management, production systems, financial controls, and reporting into a single dashboard. The re-sults were encouraging as the productivity of the employees had risen, customer satisfaction increased, and the decisions made by managers were more accurate.

4 CASE STUDY AND SITUATION ANALYSIS

This chapter will present the findings from the interviews, and offer a brief introduction of the case company. Furthermore, the development needs for the sales steering reporting system are analyzed together with the find-ings from the previous literature. Based on the analysis, suggestions for the future reporting system are discussed in the end of the chapter.