Basic tools of knowledge management in mergers and acquisitions

Knowledge management has a lot of potential goldmines to open up.
One of these goldmines, in the world of continuous mergers, fusions and take-overs is handling knowledge during the above processes.

Let’s take a simple case, but the same principles are applicable in more complex cases.

One company – on one side of the world – acquired by another company on the other side of the world. Companies, in the same industrial business, but with different knowledge, knowledge handling, knowledge maturity and structure. And this for all functions in the companies: technical, support, HR, financial: it’s all duplicated in one way or the other.

And the major hick-ups are not in solving the knowledge management using a technical solution.

People knowing me know it’s one of my crusades that knowledge management is not solved by selecting one tool and putting the knowledge in there. It’s proven enough that this simply does not work because of the dynamics of the knowledge itself, the people, the company, and the volatile environments.

Let me give a few hand-holds that can help to successful merge, fuse or acquire.

As – also for other knowledge management projects – the most important assets are the knowledge itself and the people handling this knowledge.

One tool that helps in all cases is assessing the knowledge maturity. Although (and despite we’ve developed such tools but not really commercialized them)  it is still under discussion how a culture can be measured and how precise such an assessment is, it certainly has value.

When two different cultures meet, it is important to not only understand each other’s culture, but also to know each other maturity on change management and knowledge handling.

Certainly when acquiring a company in a totally different culture, where you certainly do not know the associates of the other company, this is a quick and easy way to assess this associates up-to personal level if you would like.

Of course there are the strategies of optimizing processes, but deciding whose process will take over whose process is mostly depending on political decisions in the company – it is not always the best process.
But also here, it would be foolish not to learn from one another, doing quick assessments of each other processes. Taking a business case approach here will guide you to increase efficiency and effectivity in all cases. And in the worst case, the only added value is shared knowledge and increased awareness.

...and lot's more!

--- in case you want to know more – contact me !

It's out !! The 2019 version is out !! Order it today via info@whiteravensconsulting.com

About Opponents and Allies

It's been a while since I wrote an article. That's because there were so many interesting project going on, it's only know I got time to reflect from outside these projects.

When giving training, I always get comments on the change management model I'm using:

It's a model I learned in the early days of my career when getting change management training as 'high potential' - and I'm talking about training in the previous century. I'm all about handling people individually, and strive for the common goal, and I'm so against labeling associates and putting them in categories.
But this model resonated at that time, and it still does.

Last month I got two situations, in different companies. This blog describes the first one.

My opponent
In the first company I defended an implementation of integrated quality management systems, where the certificate would be only a side effect of a good way of working. On the other side, there were associates not knowing this type of integrated quality management systems, and really in favor of putting paper signed documents on a shared infrastructure. This opinion also had to do with the regulated industry we were working in.

(there will be yet another blog article on quality management system maturity and how to handle that on a latter date)

Since I, and also one of the persons having a difference of opinion are passionate, we kept being professional, but we stated our opinions straightforward as we saw them. Other people kept quiet

For outside people, this was a strange experience.
A vice president of the company wondered how our relationship was, and that it reminded her as if that other person and I were acting as brother and sister.

It is the first time I got the observation named as this, but in the end, this is a big compliment: because it confirms what it is. Me and that other person are opponents on this matter. But below that difference in opinion there is trust and mutual respect - what I also pronounced explicit.
The VP nodded and added 'and you're working for the same common goal'.

So you can even deepen this chart of saboteurs, enemies, opponents and allies. And the best way to thrive your company is to have your associates allied in a common goal, but have a healthy mix in opponents on approaches. Don't force all your associates to be allies in that matter as well, because opponents enrich the discussions, make sure situations are observed from different angles, making sure the best solution at a certain time is implemented !

There is one risk though: being opponents can be frustrating if the context such as this change management project is not given. So if you observe a situation like this, share this with your opponents...

Maturity, Maturity, Maturity

It is the not the first time that I am writing about this topic, but where 5 years ago I felt alone, shouting in the dessert debating the importance of maturity,
today,
the issue becomes well recognised.
I can refer to following artcile quoting KMPG : Digital strategies are barely effective (and sorry - it's in Dutch, but the title says it all).
https://www.computable.be/artikel/nieuws/digital-transformation/6374549/5440850/kpmg-digitale-strategie-is-nauwelijks-effectief.html

This lack of effectiveness is because, whether we talk about knowledge management, or a specific application of knowledge management, such as social, designing digital transformations, new ways of working,... 

always, when we talk about change: take into account the maturity.

That is why we developed a methodology over the last decade, refining this methodology, each time it is applied, to assess maturity: from person, to division, to company.

That way, you KNOW your maturity - because you have measured it.

So you KNOW how to design and implement your digital strategy.

Because success of your digital strategy depends on the people, who need to live it....

Imaging you know how each person reacts to change,

imaging you know what the skillset of each person in digital technologies is,

imaging you know how each person and division will react when implementing digital strategies....

....if you truly know this - from the associates yourself, you do not need us on this point.

If you have any question on this: we invite you to have a look on www.whiteravensculturalanalysis.com - and drop us a line.

We can do more than you think - and we will make sure, your digital strategy IS effective...

Why is this still an issue?

Please look at following figure:

You see overlap in QMS procedures and training material.

Why is this still the case?

My starting position is:

Use your procedures as training material.

If you cannot do that, something is wrong with your procedure.
If you have separate training material, consider making that your QMS procedure.

You see overlap between customer documentation and training material.

Are you sure this is minimized?

My starting position is:

Use single sourcing where possible.

Use customer documentation as training material where possible.
Or the way around.

Or do you have an overlap in what's shown in the user interface of your software and your documentation? Or do you want documentation material in your user interface?

etc.... etc....

But why is this still an issue?
Isn't that normal? Isn't that the standard?

...well, apparantly not.

Because of history...
"we are giving training using presentations already for decades"
"because it would cause company internal tensions - reducing work for the training division"
"because we do not have the tools"
"because we do not know how to start"
"because it is the responsibility of different departments - and I do not want to pick-up that ball!"
"because we're happy with the way things are"

So most of the "Reasons" I encounter are reasons focused on a status quo - and since that is not an acceptable term, typical the term "stability" or "unwanted change" is used.

But life is change.

Survival is change.

Optimization is survival.

Innovation, efficiency and effectivity are required for survival.

So what's the lesson?

There are few!

1 It is easier to manage handling continuous improvement and change,
than to handle a process - in status quo - in innovative environments.

2. Sometimes the question is just not asked: 'Do I perform double work, and
what would be the profit in optimizing this?'

And this doesn't need to take long...

An analysis is only taking maximum a few days.

Suggestions to imrpove, and building a related business case, same.

And if you need guidance, or someone else to do so?

Just call us !! 

Cultural Analysis - What you always wanted to know but were afraid to ask

Imagine.

A world where you can anticipate reaction to every change in your organization.

Imaginge a world where you know the hick-ups in your knowledge flow.

Imaging you know the knowledge maturity of every associate.

The old wolves - working for decades in your organization.

The young stallions - you want to hire.

Imaging being conscious about the focus of innovation and knowledge.

Imaging knowing which associates are good to go - without additional commounication - for innovative projects,

and which associates need a different approach or are blocking innovation.

This is only a small fragment of what cultural analysis can do for you.

Need to know more? Contact geert.willems@whiteravensconsulting.com

Quality Management Systems: the moment it is installed, it is obsolete !

www.whiteravensconsulting.com

Quality Management Systems: elaborating on a white ravens consulting service:

Why a Quality Management System?

The moment it is installed it becomes outdated and obsolete!

check it out on www.whiteravensqms.com

www.whiteravensconsulting.com - Twitter: GeertSWillems

----

20 years proof of added value by knowledge management - and why this can help you...

Knowledge management is still a key differentiator.
The possibilities of this area of expertise are enormous:
- SCRUM is an application of knowledge management
- CDT&R is an application of knowledge management
- VSM is an application of knowledge management
- Working out loud is an application of knowledge management
- Problem solving techniques are an application of knowledge management
- Kaizens are an application of knowledge management
- The ‘new way of working’ (getting old in the meantime) is an application of knowledge management
And there is so much more in the pipeline…. Knowledge management is not that very small kitten any more, it has been grown for some time. And a lot of people didn't notice, because one of the big rules in knowledge management to introduce it, is not to call it knowledge management...

‘Yeah, right’, I hear you think.
From my beginning in knowledge management (start of the nineties of previous century) I always had difficulties answering the question: “What can you do with knowledge management in a practical way”.
And even then I answered: “The possibilities are numerous ! Tell me your need, and I will give you the solution based on knowledge management principles. It will be the right solution!”.
And being a consultant, you see a lot of changes in different companies, and again I noticed that SCRUM, CDT&R, VSM etc… all have a common denominator:  knowledge management techniques.
SCRUM and agile is nothing more than applying theoretical knowledge management techniques on software development. The same for the “New Way of Working”, solving problems in organization,…
For each application, a new string of companies, consultants and methodologies was created. And we see that the tools that get hyped and are not based on knowledge management principles disappear, or only apply in very specific circumstances. We also see that the tools that are based on knowledge management principles are here to stay, or to evolve further.
But here is great thing about knowledge management: this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Four years ago, I wrote some books on knowledge management, and in one of them I gave a list of more than 100 strategic goals which can be pursuit by knowledge management.
…and if you are not pursuing your needs using knowledge management principles – as taught in our trainings – you may be heading for unpleasant surprises…
…do you know these principles?
…do you know your needs and the related knowledge management based solution?
www.whiteravensconsulting.com

The solution star to determine your knowledge management methodology, tools and techniques

www.whiteravensconsulting.com - Twitter: GeertSWillems

Building knowledge management solutions for almost two decades now, the following star to determine the knowledge management methodology, tools and techniques seems to be quiet stable!

Het meest interessante boek de laatste jaren over kennismanagement in het nederlandstalige gebied is hier te koop - ook de e-book versie:

www.whiteravensconsulting.com - Twitter: GeertSWillems - Geert Willems

Het meest interessante boek de laatste jaren over kennismanagement in het nederlandstalige gebied is hier te koop - ook de e-book versie. 196 bladzijden met daarin de meest gebruikte strategische doelstellingen die door kennismanagement ondersteund kunnen worden, de praktische regels en richtlijnen die te gebruiken zijn om uw kennismanagementinitatieven te ondersteunen en wat we praktisch moeten onthouden en kunnen gebruiken uit de laatste 20 jaar kennismanagement theorie, 
http://shop.kluwer.be/shop/nl_BE/navigation/377/20-jaar-praktische-kennismanagement-Het-wat-wanneer-en-de-richtlijnen?p=BPHRMTHEMBI14002

The suicidal definition of knowledge management

Follow us on Twitter: @GeertSWillems - www.whiteravensconsulting.com

-------------------------------------------------

I'm taking some time to restart activities, but I could not resist handling this topic.

I saw some anti-knowledge-management articles.

I love critism, since it makes people grow - when it is justified.

But when I saw an article: Enterprise 2.0 is not about knowledge management, leave the people alone, and good times will arise - something very wrong appears.

And it's also in combination with recent customer visits.

I tend to ask a customer why they invite me and what there vision on knowledge management is.

And most of the time the answer is: it is about extracting knowledge, putting this in an expert system, and reuse this knowledge.
Than it takes some will-power not to show my natural reaction. That would be:

When people blog, or give presentations on knowledge management, I really advise them to take a good look at the current status of the field of knowledge management, including,

handling complexity, starting from the personal knowledge sharing attitude and capabilities, enabling culture to share and create knowledge, taking into account life-span of knowledge, taking into account the set of solutions without using expert systems... because THAT's what Enterprise 2.0 and KM is all about today.

It seems that in other management areas, KM is still perceived as a strict, process dependent, inflexible solution... which is far from the truth!!