Here is a study, Does Knowledge Sharing Deliver on Its Promises?, by Wharton management professor Martine Haas and Morten Hansen, professor of entrepreneurship at INSEAD. They found, to no surprise that the benefits of knowledge management depend on how it is implemented.
“In a study of 182 sales teams that were bidding for new client contracts in a management consulting company, Haas and Hansen found that using personal advice from experienced colleagues can improve work quality. As an example, their paper notes that colleagues with experience in areas related to a sales proposal can provide complementary expertise that a team can draw on to generate ideas and identify possible solutions for a prospective client.
Consultants frequently travel to sales meetings with potential clients accompanied by experts from the firm who help them convey the message that the consulting work will be done by competent individuals. Also, the names and credentials of advisors often are listed in proposal documents, identifying them as contributors to the proposal and to the future project work."
However they researchers add:
“The strategy of obtaining personal advice, however, also involves processing costs. Having colleagues attend meetings or appear on client documents can backfire if these colleagues are unwilling to exert the effort needed to fully understand the client's situation, adapt their knowledge to the task at hand or respond to client demands.”
I have been in both of these situations on a number of occasions. When I worked for a large consulting company I was often brought in as a firm expert and frequently added to the proposal. I was also on proposal and project teams where the visiting expert showed up to check his email and octel and to ask for the charge code for his time. Here is a more.
"We find that using codified knowledge in the form of electronic documents saved time during the task, but did not improve work quality or signal competence to clients, whereas in contrast, sharing personal advice improved work quality and signaled competence, but did not save time,"
The cavet here is that codified documents need to have context. If they do not they can be a short cut, but a short cut to the wrong direction. Context takes time and is actually best supplied by direct contact. It should not be an either or situation in terms of codified documents or personal contact. It should be both. The codified knowledge allows you to make better use of the expert and visa versa. Thanks to Tomaoki Sawada for providing this link.
Comments